How do I keep stumbling into fail threads... just... nnnggghh.. look away, dude, look away.....
OK I can't help myself.
Most people who are jumping up and down about how WB/DC don't know what they're doing are either Marvel fanboy-DC haters, or have absolutely zero perspective. A saying about seeing a forest for the tress comes to mind...
To those without proper perspective. Relax. It's 1 - not that big of a deal, and 2 - under control. WB and DC have actually been doing this quite successfully for a long time and I'm sure will continue to do so. GL was their first attempt to boot into the "shared universe" area and unfortunately it failed. BUT they didn't just give up - they tried again with MoS and guess what? Success! $650 million later they've got an idea of where they want to go. WW, Flash etc... we'll get there. One day. But here's the thing - people forget WB/DC got stuck thanks to Nolan. They couldn't do a shared universe with the "Nolan Batman" - simply because he didn't want to. They screwed around with directors on the last Batman franchise and look where that ended up. So lesson learned, they figure "let's just let Nolan do his thing". Somewhere around $2.5 Billion dollars in gross takings later, they're ready to get going. Not exactly a bad business decision given it came off a single character franchise over 3 films. The fact is they couldn't do a shared universe WITHOUT Batman and they couldn't introduce a new or different Batman at the same time as Nolan's Batman either. So they got stuck in limbo. Once it was nearing it's end they decide to go out on a limb with GL and paid the price for it. Nothing wrong with the character, nothing wrong with the cast - poor script and poor director choice however = poorly received film that makes no money. One of the biggest issues GL faced (to me, and excluding the choice of villain which I think is also key) was that it tried too hard to be like the Marvel films. Bright, and comic-booky with the humour and such. Now, while I think all that's fine - it only works when it's a natural style and progression of the character and people involved in making the movie - not just an attempt to rip-off what someone else has and is currently doing. It feels forced and comes off tacky instead. Around the time of this they then figure that Superman might give them another chance and it did. It had a different approach - it lended that "real world" style from Batman and it worked. Some might not have liked it but the reality is, it made a good amount of money. So now that they know where to go - that's it. MoS is now the setting for their universe (I personally don't think this was the original plan though).
So how do they do that? Well, Batman makes tons of money so why not get him back on screen so they can use their two most iconic and profitable characters to launch this entire universe and get all these characters up and running by using BM/Supe's to head up and into a JL movie. From there, character popularity can determine which ones are going to work solo, and which ones only work in a team dynamic.
Now, let's pretend we're Marvel. Marvel were struggling with their characters at the mercy of other studios. Sure I maintain they had some input, but over-all they couldn't really determine much and call the shots. We want to launch a Marvel universe into the movies, but our biggest titles are taken. So they take a chance with a slightly lesser known/popular character, they get a perfectly cast actor who let's face it - needs the work, a good writer and a good director and make an absolute hit - a film that audiences of all ages really get behind. As we said, we want to make an entire universe with our characters, so now that THIS one has done so well, we can use that to link to another one. Alone none of these characters are necessarily popular or the most well known, but they've been around for a while, people recognise the names - so if people like one, they'll check out the other - as long as they KNOW they're connected. Enter the post credit teaser. So they string four character films together, which while successful (well, 3 out of 4 ain't bad), aren't exactly being the massive blockbuster hits that Batman is. BUT we've got a great director/writer and are sticking to our plans - resurrect a character who hasn't been able to gain some traction as a solo property, team him up with these other guys that are doing pretty well (and 1 in particular doing VERY well) and hit box-office gold. That whole process took 4 years to complete (in which time we're now backed by the largest and most profitable movie studio in Hollywood) and it's also been worthwhile as we can leverage this $1.5 billion property for everything else we still want to do - we've got credibility, brand recognition, and plenty of material available and no end in sight.
Meanwhile across the road is their biggest competitor who has made more from 1 character than any of theirs, but hey - that's all they've got so it's fine. Except they're about to start what Marvel did 5 years ago now, off the back of an almost $2.5 billion franchise, and while they're looking to get into the 2nd phase of character films and try some other random titles, DC have also launched their new universe tester film to the tune of $650 Million (which no Marvel character matched in their first outing) and are about to combine that character (who is arguably the single most iconic and recognised character in the history of comic books) with their $2.5 billion character (arguably the single most popular character in comic books and CBM's overall) as the follow up move - to then (most likely) lead into a team up movie that features far more iconic and well known characters than any of Marvel's ones (with the exception of Spider-man I guess, except he's over at Sony) to take on Avengers.
So how about everyone get some perspective on exactly what's happening over at WB and DC. If they tried to keep up and in time with Marvel, we wouldn't have had the TDK trilogy - it's that simple - and they wouldn't have $2.5 billion to justify keeping on going (necessary after GL's outing). And we'll likely get a JL film in the same amount of time as it took to get to Avengers (assuming they hold to 2017 as it's currently believed), but without any of the filler. GL can come back in the same way Hulk did (who they still can't decide if he's capable of carrying his own film). In fact Superman/Batman and the idea of a JL film alone is already generating more press and buzz and excitement than any of the moves Marvel did 4 years ago. So they don't need to vocalise what their plans are - it's more interesting to let us talk amongst ourselves and then surprise us with something we didn't see coming.
Log in to comment