Love it or hate it (or something in between), Man of Steel has ushered in a new era for DC’s cinematic universe. The upcoming sequel, known as Batman vs. Superman in lieu of an official title, will introduce at least one of Kal-El’s fellow members of the Justice League, though rumors abound that other superheroes will make an appearance (Robin, it seems, may’ve already been confirmed).

Warner Bros. and DC studio executives having been helping to fan the fire, by dropping hints about upcoming movies that feature Aquaman (who was recently labeled “a priority character”) and Wonder Woman. Discussions about the latter’s overdue feature debut have re-ignited over the past couple of weeks, thanks to Katniss Everdeen’s sequel The Huger Games: Catching Fire tearing up the box office (and proving that, yes, it is possible to make a well-crafted genre movie that both features a female protagonist and is accessible to moviegoers of all genders).

The latest update on the situation is that the DC company’s ‘big announcement’ for 2014 will be a plan to release two lower-budgeted projects a year – one in the springtime and the other in the fall/autumn – alongside the major tentpoles featuring heavy-hitters, like the members of the Justice League (those could be released in theaters every couple of years).

dcuniverse DC Planning to Release Two Low Budget Superhero Films a Year?

Bleeding Cool previously reported that Davis S. Goyer – whose comic book movie history extends far beyond writing Man of Steel and co-writing The Dark Knight trilogy – may be in line to serve as the architect of the DC film universe hereon forward, now that he’s finally signed a formal deal with WB (after years of working for the studio). The site revealed that movie treatments based on lesser-known DC comic book properties – Suicide Squad, Team 7 and Deathstroke among them – are currently in development, with Goyer serving as the creative foreman.

Suicide Squad – revolving around a team of incarcerated super villains who undertake black ops missions for the government – is a movie that Bleeding Cool reports could be made within the $20-40 million budget range (not including marketing costs), which is fairly small compared to the pretty penny that WB/DC invested for production on Man of Steel ($225 million). Similarly, shows like Once Upon a Time have demonstrated that the world of Fables - a noir-influenced comic book property about fairy tale characters – can be satisfactorily realized on a TV budget, so a relatively cheap full-length feature (which DC President Diane Nelson has expressed interest in making) seems perfectly feasible.

Amanda Waller and the Suicide Squad DC Planning to Release Two Low Budget Superhero Films a Year?

Additionally, if this report proves accurate, then it goes to show how much the DC game plan has evolved and changed over the past year, considering it was less than twelve months ago that producer Dan Lin claimed that the company (and WB) intends to “finish their A-list stories first,” before tackling more obscure superhero properties. (Marvel Studios will help to pave that road next year, when it releases Guardians of the Galaxy in theaters.)

Last year when news leaked about DC setting in motion a movie adaptation of The Metal Men comic book series – with Men in Black trilogy helmer Barry Sonnenfeld attached to direct – and Suicide Squad was ‘announced’ near the same time, it seemed like a sign that DC might not imitate Marvel Studios’ approach with its cinematic universe. And that would be justifiable, as we’ve discussed before how different Marvel and DC properties are from one another, thematically/artistically speaking - so why should their movies be constructed in the same fashion?

There’s a risk inherent to this rumored DC approach, as the lower-budgeted superhero films won’t have built-in awareness like Marvel releases (or, as a similar example, Lucasfilm’s plans for Star Wars spinoffs in between the upcoming Episodes); as we saw with Dredd, lower-cost niche comic book adaptations can be strong creative accomplishments, but unfortunately that doesn’t guarantee a large turnout at the box office.

Still, if the superhero genre is to continue thriving in the future, then it needs to continue diversifying in terms of content – and that’s something that the proposed DC approach would encourage.

http://screenrant.com/dc-superhero-movies-suicide-squad-team-7-deathstroke/

Well that could work, lower budget superhero movies could introduce audiences to characters such as the Metal men, Deathstroke etc as well as keeping the big ones still working (everyone in the Justice League). I'm curious what will they announce? I still hope The Flash is on the cards.

Anyone know if Del Toro is still working on that Justice League Dark movie?

Last I heard, he still is.

real question is would non comic readers even know of jl dark?

Real question is, why do people need to know what it is now to be interested in it in the future? People see movies that aren't part of established franchises and that are about concepts they've never heard about before all the time. Comic book movies aren't any different than regular movies, other than the fact that they have a small fan base already established.

i think people who dont read comics only know of superman batman and wonder woman honestly. i admit i do read comics but i can flat out say i dont know jack about jld . it would almost be like the studio would have to throw in someone like batman in jl dark just to sell tickets from people who only know of that charachter and to me from a movie point of view by having batman in would ruin the other charachters like swampthing zatana or constantine.. it would be like have batman outshine everyone in there own movie

One step closer to making my "Suicide Squad" film a reality.

This is great news.

Suicide Squad would be awesome! Who is the roster?

Dude, did you even read what I posted? It doesn't matter if they don't know any of the characters. It's no different than them going to see a regular non-comic movie that's being advertised. It just won't have that extra draw, like a regular movie vs. a franchise movie. It doesn't necessarily need that to sell though. Like any other movie, it just needs to look interesting in the trailers.

It's just a rumor so I don't think anyone really knows yet.

I think smaller budget films for superheroe films could bring out the best directors since Warner Brothers are actually good at spotting talent among that field (Christopher Nolan, Clint Eastwood, Ben Affleck, Baz Luhmannn). It would also allow them to have creative control over the character how they see fit just as Nolan did with Batman.

This pretty much sums it up. Established character fan bases generally only come into play where you're looking for a big blockbuster hit that's gonna push above the $600 million mark. Otherwise if you can make a movie for like $20 or $30 million and have it earn $200 million - then you've got a MASSIVE winner. Sure it's not the big blockbuster hit of like Man of Steel or Batman or whatever - but it didn't need to be.

Constantine has already been done in case anyone forgot as an R rated film - something it's expected Marvel WON'T do. They might - but right at this moment it doesn't seem likely. No, it wasn't a massive success - but that had to do with people not really liking the movie a whole lot - I saw it without realising it was even a CBM. It wasn't until the credits at the beginning opened up and I saw the DC logo I was like "oh wait... is this a comic?" Same thing happened with The Losers (which IMO was better than The A-Team). Fact is most movies that get made are not leveraging an existing fan base - but if you make it well, and get people interested - they go and see it. How do you get people interested? Get the right director/producer or a good big name actor associated with it - that usually helps (I'd say Constantine wouldn't have done barely anything if it wasn't for Keanu Reeves). People forget for example that Iron Man didn't just re-launch RDJ's career - his choice for the role after basically having no career for ages generated publicity and interest as well. It was a cool film that audiences really enjoyed and suddenly Iron Man is their flagship character on the big screen.

The OP's reference to Hunger Games though showing how WW could work is ridiculous. The Hunger Games novels had a massive fan base already that rivaled the likes of twilight. They then made a pretty decent first film which shot the novels awareness and success through the roof, and set up a sequel that is performing brilliantly. WW does NOT have the same amount of fans as the Hunger Games books - completely different demographic of reader and Hunger Games has wider appeal to modern audiences. A more comparable property to me is Lara Croft and the Tomb Raider movies - which have done OK at the box office - but not enough to justify anyone screaming "see - WW will make lots of money".

oh yea we all know trailers do a movie justice : eye roll: remember green lantern? every trailer they showed couldnt save that movie from tanking hard. trailers can be very misleading

you apparently dont understand that super hero films are being aimed at new audiances as well. as i said before the only way a justice leuage dark film will work amongst new people would have to involve someone already established. wouldnt you think the movie will sell if people who ride hard on the batman craze would see it if batman wa sin it?

id also like to argue tomb raider is what 12 years old so thats in the past and seeing as jennifer lawrence is proving to be a major female actor not just in hunger games but xmen as well proves a female hero or villain can in fact work. or look at jamie alexander who plays sif. despite the amount of screentime she had in both thor films you must be a fool to think that charachter she portrayed hasnt really made a mark for female leads to carry a film.

id also like to argue if marvel can do a movie involving a walking tree and a racoon with a gun fetish than no wonder woman isnt impossible to do. its lazieness and no balls on wb and dc's part

Duh. That's why it's the most important thing about getting someone to see a movie. If the trailer looks awesome you won't know the movie sucks until after you pay to watch it. That's why we have trailers in the first place. The point is to make the trailers look interesting to draw in some viewers, then make the movie good so that they'll tell others to watch it and give it good reviews.

What? I don't even know what point you're trying to make here. So to market something to a new audience they need to use an existing audience? What does that have to do with Catching Fire not being a valid reference/argument for a WW film?

Mystique wasn't exactly the lead character in X-Men: First Class. Hell she wasn't even the the primary supporting character. She was a side character. Might have been the "female" lead specifically - but the film was about Xavier and Magneto - not Mystique. And it wasn't exactly the most successful film either - hence why Singer is back for DoFP. As for Sif - as much as I like her - I wouldn't see a stand-alone film. Again she's not the main character - not even the main female character - she's 3rd in that line. Chuck her in a stand-alone movie and see how it does. My prediction is it's about as successful as Elektra was. Neither is providing a case for WW.

GoG may suck - why is everyone assuming this film is going to work? Sure - it'll make money since it's already being attached to the broader Avengers thing (and yes - this is using something people are familiar with and like to launch a new thing just like you're arguing), but the film may suck - and I gotta say, from the trailer - I'm personally not impressed. Someone would have to provide a pretty compelling argument to get me to go see it so far. Again - this is no way provides an argument that WW can be made and be successful where almost ALL female led action films aren't. There's only a small handful that stand-out as a success, and WB may genuinely want it to be a half billion dollar movie - in which case, Hunger Games sits alone in that bracket. No other female led action films have gotten there. I don't blame WB for being apprehensive since a WW film would likely demand a big budget (I'd wager over $200 million thanks to the mythical stuff - another factor that may work against the film - a female led CBM action film with a Greek myth setting/backstory/features - yeah, sounds like box office gold to me, since well..... nope - no films come to mind that are successful combining those tropes.. actually I can't think of any films that have that combination at all). If they can make it for $100-$150 million - then it doesn't need to earn as much. I like they're going to go for JL first - that way we can see if anyone actually likes their take on the character first and it can launch into a solo franchise. Just keep your fingers crossed for 2017.

@WIshIWasSuperman gotg will be great have you seen slither? if not i reccomend it and you would see why james gunn is the perfect choice for gotg. if it sucks it sucks but at least marvel can say they tried it and move on unlike dc who back pedles because a movie tanks hard ( green lantern). thats why i say dc needs to get there shit together and take a few risks and they can afford it its not like they cant. i mean hey they gave us that god awful nightmare on elm street remake in 2010. i dont even read wonderwoman but give me 3 days to a week i promise you i can write a fantastic story for her seeing as she would be more fantasy instead of realistic.

That's part of the issue though. WB have made a pretty conscious choice to try and make their films "real" (at least in terms of style) - which for the most part WW doesn't fit the mold of.

Also - you've panned WB for what happened with Green Lantern (which was them taking a risk and going outside their normal Super-Hero film mold), but given credit to Marvel for something that hasn't happened yet? That's not very fair IMO. WB admitted they made mistakes with GL, and they moved on - they reset their ideas and plans and have taken a different approach, which so far looks like a good idea. Where's the "at least they tried" mentality for them? Also if GotG sucks - we have no idea what Marvel will do. Based on what's happened with Hulk - they're no different to WB - "we have no plans to do anything with Hulk" after Incredible Hulk failed to live up to expectations and the failure that was the Ang Lee Hulk film (although that wasn't Marvel's fault). Now after Avengers and everyone liking Hulk's portrayal in that "Oh, we're considering Hulk as a character and think we can do some interesting things with him, but that might happen later, and it depends on who else can work with him". One rumour is that they're looking at a TV show now, whereas prior to Avengers, Hulk's only place was in the Avenger's films. Oh and let's not forget Hulk is the only pre-avengers character to not get a sequel, despite Incredible Hulk coming out alongside Iron Man when the first formulated their 12 part plan - do we honestly think a Hulk sequel wasn't in there originally when all other characters DID have sequels planned? So yes - Marvel back peddle too.

@spideyivydaredevilfan26: Please put Deathstroke on it, and ensure that Harley Quinn doesn't even sniff the film. I really don't care who else.

all i have to say is alan taylor that is all. the man did some game of thrones plus thor the dark world and i think he would be perfect for a wonder woman film.

another one would be duncan jones im a big fan of his and hes doing the war craft movie . i never played the game but ill still see the flick since its jones man. thats how good he is. see moon and source code and you will see why i like the guy a lot.

in green lanterns case the reason why it failed is because they got a guy who is known to be more of a action director. it isnt a knock or anything but i felt since day one rockne s'o bannon wouldve did gl justice. the man did farscape.

i may get screamed at for this but i would actually like to see affleck direct a batman movie. he has proven to me he can not only direct a fantastic crime drama but also write a pretty damn good one

I like Game of Thrones (love it in fact) but I don't think the style translates as well to film - but that's me. Thor: The Dark World for example didn't really over-whelm me personally - but that's me.

I've seen Source Code - missed Moon. Source Code I thought was really good and under-rated. I'll hold off on more opinions until Warcraft is out - again - it could suck. I try not to assume a movie will be awesome until I've at least got a trailer to go off personally - hence my early takes on GotG arne't the best - I thought the trailer sucked.

I'm not saying a stand-alone WW film can't be awesome - it can. BUT that doesn't mean it will be a success financially, or that it can fit within the world they've created in MoS. But I hope like hell we see WW sooner rather than later and that it is awesome and a massive success too.

Green Lantern had lots of issues. I don't' think it's as bad as others do - but I think it had lots of issues. You may be right as to the choice of director. But I still think as a collective group it's only fair to say "at least they tried", if the same grace is being given to Marvel.

I agree with you - but based on interviews with previous directors and stars from Batman and looking at Snyder for example - I don't think it's physically possible for him to do both. His other films aren't action packed movies - they're very much drama based, which while I'm sure has it's own challenges - I don't think has to deal with the same issues as an action film. I remember seeing an interview with Zack Snyder around the time they finally wrapped up MoS and he looked very tired and kind of ill. He seems fine now, but he definitely looked like he was struggling during that interview. And he was "just" directing. Trying to be the main star as well - given how Christian Bale has talked about the role and what Henry Cavill had to do to keep up with MoS - he'd have to be super-human himself to pull it off I think. But I agree he's proven his worth as a director and is capable of some brilliant stuff.