An old rant (Re:DC movies)...

[DR.MID-NITE]

I know its been discussed before. But, as a DC comic fan it really pisses me off that in the span of 5years. Marvel has put out....
-Spiderman (+2 sequels)
-X-Men (+2 sequels)
-Blade (+ 2 sequels)
-Iron Man
-Daredevil
-Elecktra
-Punisher (+1 sequel)
-The Hulk
-Fantastic 4 (+1 sequel w/Silver Surfer)
-Ghost Rider

With a few others slated to be released.

Now here's DC....
-Batman Begins (+1 sequel coming)
-Superman Returns (+1 sequel coming)
-Catwoman
-"V" for Vendetta

Now, I am not saying every Marvel release is great. But, at least they were big budget attempts. DC is just ridiculous....all talk.

[JustJack]

Quality over Quantity?
Okay...that argument doesn't work. I'd say even Elektra was better than Catwoman.

Though, you have to admit, Marvel has been very upbeat about adapting just about anything into film. They have a real "we will find a way" attitude. Whereas WB has a real "how the hell are we going to adapt that?!" attitude.
I'd say it's the fact that Marvel spread the licenses to so many different creative outlets. Warner Brothers is a single studio, they can't focus on just making films based on DC and Vertigo properties (btw, you forgot Constantine). They could fill up an entire years slate with nothing but DC/Vertigo series. Meanwhile, with Marvel having different studio's releasing different properties, they can release 3 or 4 different movie's a year (along with their direct-to-video stuff).

Marvel has been smart about licensing their products...DC has not. If DC gave Lionsgate or Sony a few characters, we would probably see more accurately-adapted DC flicks popping out every year. Alas...with Warner and their "Heroes with glowing Rings should be in a comedy" attitude, we'll only see a DC movie churned out every once n' a while...and not very well adapted, either.

[Young Justice]

Now, I am not saying every Marvel release is great. But, at least they were big budget attempts. DC is just ridiculous....all talk.

Warner Brother should have hired someone at DC Comics to be the Editor in Chief of the DC movies. Batman Begins would be an awesome start for a proper DC Live Action Universe just like Bruce Timm did with the cartoons.

This Editor in Chief should have embraced the "grounded in reality" idea of Nolan and put that to use into the other characters. With that concept defined he or she should have started to look to creative teams to give them the franchises. And the whole set of movies should have been planned ahead before giving them to directors and writers.

If WB had done that we would have ourselves a Superman Begins instead of a Superman Returns and much better chances to see proper movies about Wonder Woman, Justice League, Titans, Doom Patrol, Birds of Prey and even Legion of Super Heroes.

[Bird Boy]

Don't forget to add "Constantine" to the list of DC movies. Not that improves the list that much, but still.

-BB

[The Weed Of Cri]

The pendulum has merely swung in the Marvel direction. Remember about 25 years ago, during the late '70's and through the '80's: DC had the Tim Burton Batman movies, the Christopher Reeve Supeman franchise, and the Flash TV series (a ratings bomb, I know, but it was a damn fine show and had Mark Hamill dress-rehearsing his Joker chops as The Trickster). Meanwhile, Marvel was struggling with bankruptcy and a corporate buyout, and was cranking out junk like the original Punisher movie (with Dolph Lundgren as a monosyllabic Frank Castle), and stuff like Captain America and Fantastic Four movies that couldn't even get booked into theaters and ended up as studio tax write-offs, while constantly hyping plans for big-budget Spider-Man and Silver Surfer movies which repeatedly changed director, scripts and casts and never seemed to get out of development hell.

[HaagenDas]

I agree with The Weed of Cri about Marvel only recently doing well starting with the release of X-Men.

To address Just Back's point about multiple studios, it wouldnt be a good idea for DC if they want a Justice League film to be able to make it happen. Ultimately, that is the goal and something that can be better than any superhero movie ever made thus far if done right.

[Palin Dromos]

Agreed with the point that DC had the market pre-Blade.

Another thing to note is that with Marvel leasing the rights to their characters the various studios are given a finite time period in which to produce a film with that property. (hence the orginal FF movie that never saw the light of a projector)

With limited contract times the studios are compeled to release a film to regain that invested capital.

At Warners, since they own the rights to all the characters there is no time pressure to release a film. Although one upside to owning all the pieces is that crossovers, and team-ups and team films are slightly more possible. You won't see a Spider-Man/Daredevil crossover anytime soon with the character rights seperated at Sony and Fox.

Ciao,
PD

[PeterFries]

Warner Brother should have hired someone at DC Comics to be the Editor in Chief of the DC movies.

WB did hire someone in 2003 to fill this role. His name is Gregory Noveck. When he came onboard, Catwoman was already too far along to make it practical to pull the plug on it, but his track record otherwise has been pretty good.

It's not a race to see who can clog theaters with superhero popcorn flicks. I'd rather see a great DC-based movie every few years, as we've been getting, than the scattershot shotgun approach Marvel takes.

Unlike DC, Marvel pretty much exists only as a loss leader for their movie licensing, so the second those start tanking that's probably it for their comic book division.

[Cortez2301]

Catwoman isn't even a Dc comics movie.I mean its just the name and the fact that she was sort of cat-like.

[The Penguin]

Catwoman isn't even a Dc comics movie.I mean its just the name and the fact that she was sort of cat-like.

So that DC logo at the beginning was just for fun?

While not dealing much with the actual comic version of the character (that might have actually been good), it is officially associated with DC.

[Damien]

Thank you, Bird Boy. On both counts.

There's no excuse for DC anymore. It's not hard. Even when Marvel puts out a crappy movie, people flock to the next one. Only half of the DC list is any good. Marvel got it right from the beginning of their current run, which leaves room for mistakes later. DC is already swinging and missing. It's disheartening, but true, and there's no one who'd like to see a good DC film more than me...and you guys.

[StormBlue]

I understand the disenchantment towards the lack of DC movies versus Marvel movies. However, can you explain the following?

Only half of the DC list is any good. Marvel got it right from the beginning of their current run, which leaves room for mistakes later. DC is already swinging and missing. It's disheartening, but true, and there's no one who'd like to see a good DC film more than me...and you guys.

What defines the "DC list?" If it's the list that's been established in this thread (Batman Begins, Superman Returns, Catwoman, Constantine, V for Vendetta), then in your opinion what has or has not been good?

Here's how I'd rank the DC movie quality:

FANTASTIC
Batman Begins
V for Vendetta

Interesting and worthy of a sequel
Superman Returns

Ridiculously BAD
Catwoman

Never Saw (so I can't judge)
Constantine

Regardless of how you rank the quality of DC movies either recent or all inclusive, nothing gets over the fact that Marvel is in its upswing. However, I think I prefer the balance that has been set now. If DC were to step up its game and start pumping out movies at a faster rate, I'd fear market saturation from the perspective of the typical movie-goer who doesn't know much about comics at all. I'd hate to return to the period of the late 90's where we were deficient in good superhero movies. I guess I'd rather play it safe and have DC/Warner come out with something good and decent that reflections their devotion to the concept than just pump out a movie because a hot star is around. Maybe Catwoman was such a mistake.

Oh me...I really need to get back to work .

[Young Justice]

Never Saw (so I can't judge)
Constantine

This movie could be put into the "Interesting and worthy of a sequel" category.

WB did hire someone in 2003 to fill this role. His name is Gregory Noveck. When he came onboard, Catwoman was already too far along to make it practical to pull the plug on it, but his track record otherwise has been pretty good.

I'm afraid I don't agree that he is doing that good of a job. Wonder Woman and Flash just have been over a delepoment hell and recently had their plugs pulled and their franchises given to a different creative team. I think what is missing is future planning. Looking ahead, and being strong in that decision. An Editor in Chief would have the powers to decide how the DC live action universe would be and stick with it. I don't see Mr. Noveck doing it. It appears that for every movie, every franchise, there's someone different to give the final word. And that's bad if you trying to to a consistent super hero universe.

[PeterFries]

I'm afraid I don't agree that he is doing that good of a job. Wonder Woman and Flash just have been over a delepoment hell and recently had their plugs pulled and their franchises given to a different creative team. I think what is missing is future planning. Looking ahead, and being strong in that decision. An Editor in Chief would have the powers to decide how the DC live action universe would be and stick with it. I don't see Mr. Noveck doing it. It appears that for every movie, every franchise, there's someone different to give the final word. And that's bad if you trying to to a consistent super hero universe.

If you read the Variety article, Noveck was charged with finding ways to bring various DC properties to various media, which he is doing (I've seen his name mentioned in stories about Bruce Timm's animated DVD initiative, too). He wasn't charged with creating some kind of colossal fanwank cohesive DC Universe on celluloid. I think, Catwoman aside, that there has been a fairly consistent recent attention to quality. I'd personally rather see a great Superman and Batman movie every few years than one-weekend-wonders like Ghost Rider, Daredevil or Elektra being done with DC's Z-list heroes.

We're not privvy to what's happened behind the scenes with the WW and/or Flash projects, but it seems like someone in charge judged them not worth doing, possibly for quality reasons, possibly for budgetary reasons. Noveck was a longterm collegue of Joel Silver, who is attached to the Wonder Woman project, so there's probably a lot going on there behind the scenes we just don't know about.

Again, what's the rush? Superman, Batman and Captain Marvel all made it to the silver screen in the 1940s; it took Marvel's heroes another fifty years to finally get movies made based on them. Just because they're getting rushed out as fast as possible to cash in while the interest is there (while also probably burning out that interest with overexposure) doesn't mean WB has a compelling need to glut the market as well.

[IanC]

DC can only deal with WB and WB owned companies (example, New Line). Marvel is free to deal with any studio it likes, plus its own newish one.

That pretty much explains why theres more Marvel than DC based films.

[Cortez2301]

So that DC logo at the beginning was just for fun?

There was a logo? Was it the new one of or the old one? Anyhow I must have missed it.

[PeterFries]

DC can only deal with WB and WB owned companies (example, New Line). Marvel is free to deal with any studio it likes, plus its own newish one.

That pretty much explains why theres more Marvel than DC based films.

Obviously, the preferable situation for DC is to have their parent company develop and release the movies, since they are taking advantage of IP and licenses that WB already owns, but there's no real roadblock there other than not wanting to turn Warner Brothers' entire slate into comic book adaptations.

It's worth mentioning that WB and Legendary Pictures (the same partnership that made Superman Returns and Batman Begins) produced and released 300 last month, which was based on a Dark Horse graphic novel.

[Shawn Hopkins]

I know its been discussed before. But, as a DC comic fan it really pisses me off that in the span of 5years. Marvel has put out....
-Spiderman (+2 sequels)
-X-Men (+2 sequels)
-Blade (+ 2 sequels)
-Iron Man
-Daredevil
-Elecktra
-Punisher (+1 sequel)
-The Hulk
-Fantastic 4 (+1 sequel w/Silver Surfer)
-Ghost Rider

With a few others slated to be released.

Now here's DC....
-Batman Begins (+1 sequel coming)
-Superman Returns (+1 sequel coming)
-Catwoman
-"V" for Vendetta

Now, I am not saying every Marvel release is great. But, at least they were big budget attempts. DC is just ridiculous....all talk.

Add Constantine, Road to Perdition, League of Extraordinary Gentleman, the Fountain and a History of Violence to the DC list. These were all Vertigo, America's Best Comics or Paradox press books and those are all DC imprints. Also, there's a Watchmen and a Wonder Woman movie in the works and a new Batman sequel planned. And I think Brian K. Vaughn is writing a Y: The Last Man movie.

I agree about the quality, though. The only DC movie that has been really great lately has been Begins and I guess Road to Perdition, although I haven't seen it.

[JustJack]

I suppose it's fair to say that DC sticking with WB is best for quality control. Marvel films have been kind of "bleh" lately, with the exception of Spider-Man.

On the other hand, Warner clearly doesn't entirely respect the comic properties from DC. Forget Catwoman for a second, and look at Constantine. Sure, a fine film indeed (I loved it), but is it Hellblazer? No. Ef' No. Keanu is no John Constantine, and that Even Steven's kid is no Chas. Relocating the story to LA, and making John an American does show a great deal of disrespect for the material.
Meanwhile, Green Lantern can't get off the ground because the fans threw a fit when they found out Warner wanted to make it a comedy. They wanted to make it a comedy because...they don't respect the material. Warner finds characters like Wonder Woman and Flash to be too corny to adapt, and thus send each script they find into production-purgatory. They have no respect for the material.

So what DOES Warner Bros. do? They dig until they find safe material, like Road to Perdition, and History of Violence. Those are easy to adapt, and 80% of the public wouldn't believe they're based on graphic novels if told. They're not trying to adapt superheroes, because they feel DC superheroes are hokey.

My simple point being...at least Marvel believe's in there product. Sure, the flicks themselves may not be all that good, but we are dealing with some corn-dog material here, and Marvel doesn't fear corny...they revel in it.


BTW ShawnHopkins, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was made by 20th Century Fox.

[Young Justice]

If you read the Variety article, Noveck was charged with finding ways to bring various DC properties to various media, which he is doing (I've seen his name mentioned in stories about Bruce Timm's animated DVD initiative, too). He wasn't charged with creating some kind of colossal fanwank cohesive DC Universe on celluloid.

But that's exactly what I think WB and DC should have done it. A cohesive DC Universe is a fan dream of course, but if it is done right it will bring other viewers to the franchises just like it did with the Bruce Timm animation universe. Would it been such a success if it wasn't integrated? I don't think so. And I know there were a lot of people that got interested in the DC characters because of Bruce Timm cartoons. That's the spirit I think they shoud have chosen for the live action franchises.

I think, Catwoman aside, that there has been a fairly consistent recent attention to quality. I'd personally rather see a great Superman and Batman movie every few years than one-weekend-wonders like Ghost Rider, Daredevil or Elektra being done with DC's Z-list heroes.

I completely agree with you. The only bit I can disagree a little is about Superman Returns. It was a good movie, but also a bit disappointing.

We're not privvy to what's happened behind the scenes with the WW and/or Flash projects, but it seems like someone in charge judged them not worth doing, possibly for quality reasons, possibly for budgetary reasons. Noveck was a longterm collegue of Joel Silver, who is attached to the Wonder Woman project, so there's probably a lot going on there behind the scenes we just don't know about.

You got a point here too. But I said what I've said before based on the decision to give the Flash character to the guy who directed "One night at the Museum". I don't think it was a good move. But let's see the movie made and make our comments.

Again, what's the rush? Superman, Batman and Captain Marvel all made it to the silver screen in the 1940s; it took Marvel's heroes another fifty years to finally get movies made based on them. Just because they're getting rushed out as fast as possible to cash in while the interest is there (while also probably burning out that interest with overexposure) doesn't mean WB has a compelling need to glut the market as well.

I don't think they need to rush nor deliver a lot of second and third rate heroes movies like Marvel. But it's boring to have all this franchises in development hell. A good DC movie per year would be awsome.