|
|
Post by stargazer1682 on Jun 3, 2018 15:10:39 GMT
I think Constantine becoming a Season Regular is the only thing that saved it. I would rather see 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow' cancelled and replaced with a TV show about another superhero and if their version of 'Batwoman' is good and popular then they should axe 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow' for a 'Batwoman' TV show or a 'Bat Family' show with Batwoman, The Spoiler, Orphan, Red Robin, Azrael, Red Hood, Bluebird, Batwing and others like 'Detective Comics Rebirth' but Scott Snyder, Marguerite Bennett or James Tynion IV should be writing it.  Nah they need to stay as far away from Batman as possible, not only is the Batman brand too all encompassing with DC already but people are utter twats about it, how many people refused to watch gotham because it was a batman show without batman? sure some had the excuses of "if it was like gotham PD I wouldn't mind but it's not, and the villains exist before batman what the hell?!?!?!".
Almost any bat brand show will suffer from the lack of Batman, also no way should the CW try and do a Bat related show, their too seriously taken by fans and CW likes to fuck with shit too much, I would want a Blue Beetle show, I haven't seen much of the character but what I have I have liked and a younger character fits the CW's shtick, that or spin Constantine off of Legends and put him in a show with Zatanna, because then A: Zatanna & B: Constantine = C@ Me very happy boy...hear that CW???...DO IT!!
I'm actually curious, though not holding my breath, to see what Legends will be like next season adding Constantine to the cast. Hopefully it'll be a little more like Justice League Dark, which I've come to think is how this show should have been formatted. I think they ditched the time travel aspect and dove headlong into supernatural, even if the tone remains the same, the inherent issues with the internal logic of the plot wouldn't necessarily be as problematic. You can suspend disbelief a little more with magic and boogie men.
|
|
|
|
Post by General Kenobi on Jun 5, 2018 10:29:30 GMT
While normally I would be excited to see more of matt Ryan's Constantine, I am dismayed that it is on Legends of Tomorrow. You could not get me to watch that show if you paid me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 12:45:56 GMT
I don't blame you for dropping 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow.' It is the weakest out of all the 'Arrowverse' TV shows I have seen and while I would say the latest season of 'The Flash' was the worst this season it more disappointingly bad and not expected to be bad like 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow' is. The problem with 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow' is they go overboard with the comedy elements and they make all the villains and threats they are facing look like jokes. I haven't seen 'Black Lightning' yet 'cause it hasn't aired here in Australia and I am not sure if it even will now but 'Gotham' and 'Krypton' are the best and 'Supergirl' has Amy Jackson and Katie McGrath which makes the show worth watching even though it is nothing like the 'Supergirl' comic books. Out of all the DC TV shows this season from best to worst I would say Gotham, Krypton, Supergirl, Arrow, DC's Legends of Tomorrow and the Flash. Have you seen 'Marvel's The Runaways' and 'The Gifted?' Those two were good especially 'The Runaways' with Karolina Dean. I've watched The Gifted which I've enjoyed. I don't have a Hulu account so I haven't seen The Runaways yet. Legion is probably my favorite comic book show. Are you a fan of any of the Marvel Netflix shows? Ohh. Okay. I didn't realise you needed to have a Hulu account in America to watch 'Marvel's The Runaways.' Over here in Australia we get it on Fox 8 (which is a channel on Foxtel) which also airs 'Arrow', 'Gotham', 'Supergirl', 'The Flash', 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow' and 'Marvel's The Gifted' and we recently found out the new 'Cloak and Dagger' TV show is going to air here on Fox 8 too starting on the 1st of July and we are going to watch that. I saw the first season of 'Daredevil' but I haven't seen any of the other Netflix Marvel shows. We don't have Netflix but we have a friend who does that lends us the shows and my favourite Netflix show is 'Travelers' which has Mackenzie Porter (my avatar) as the main star) and I loved 'Everything Sucks' with Sydney Sweeney until they cancelled it and I decided then and there we were not paying for Netflix 'cause Sydney deserved better. 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 12:58:18 GMT
I think Constantine becoming a Season Regular is the only thing that saved it. I would rather see 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow' cancelled and replaced with a TV show about another superhero and if their version of 'Batwoman' is good and popular then they should axe 'DC's Legends of Tomorrow' for a 'Batwoman' TV show or a 'Bat Family' show with Batwoman, The Spoiler, Orphan, Red Robin, Azrael, Red Hood, Bluebird, Batwing and others like 'Detective Comics Rebirth' but Scott Snyder, Marguerite Bennett or James Tynion IV should be writing it.  Nah they need to stay as far away from Batman as possible, not only is the Batman brand too all encompassing with DC already but people are utter twats about it, how many people refused to watch gotham because it was a batman show without batman? sure some had the excuses of "if it was like gotham PD I wouldn't mind but it's not, and the villains exist before batman what the hell?!?!?!".
Almost any bat brand show will suffer from the lack of Batman, also no way should the CW try and do a Bat related show, their too seriously taken by fans and CW likes to fuck with shit too much, I would want a Blue Beetle show, I haven't seen much of the character but what I have I have liked and a younger character fits the CW's shtick, that or spin Constantine off of Legends and put him in a show with Zatanna, because then A: Zatanna & B: Constantine = C@ Me very happy boy...hear that CW???...DO IT!!
I agree with you about a 'Zatanna and Constantine' TV Show Dazz and I would love to see a show of that too but I respefectly disagree with you about the Bat Family and when we are getting spinoff shows of Alfred Pennyworth of all characters it is time we get the Bat Family on screen. I am not saying they should nesaccarily do it on the CW Netowrk and am really hoping Batwoman and the 'Batwoman' TV show if it goes through are good but on the DC Online Streaming Service I see no reason why we can't have a 'Red Hood and the Outlaws' show and a show based on 'Detective Comics Rebirth' with the Spoiler, Orphan, Red Robin, Bluebird, Azrael, Batwing, Clayface, the Spectre, The Signal, Gotham Girl and others. I don't think they need to have Batman for it to work - the success of a lot of the Bat Family characters getting their own spinoff series and 'Birds of Prey' and 'Teen Titans' being two of DC's biggest selling team series of all time prove that. I mean 'Teen Titans' is DC's biggest selling team series of all time. It has higher sales than the 'Justice League' showing more people wanted to see Dick and characters like Raven, Starfire and Beast Boy than Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman teaming up together.
A lot of the people that refused to watch 'Gotham' on the IMDB boards were saying they would watch a 'Batgirl' or 'Nightwing' show but they didn't like the fact 'Gotham' wasn't a superhero show. The 'Alfred' show will most likely not be a superhero show either but the other characters can be. 
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jun 8, 2018 17:42:45 GMT
I just think DC for 30 years has put way too much focus on Batman to the point they created their own problem, Batman eclipses DC as a brand, atleast in America, so they should try and continue to give their other titles and characters their own platforms, DC already oversaturates their animated films with the batfamily so why not just keep doing that as it is working use the time to establish a bunch of their other characters whilst having 1 or 2 properties about the batfamily or featuring them in play.
I mean personally what with WB/DC having half the in development projects about Batman or the Bat-Family I don't want every other TV show following along also, especially with DC's current hands on hands off hands on hands off approach of treating their IP's like hot potatoes, and any Bat related project is going to have the problem of how do you tell these stories if any given season the ability to actually tell their stories fully is or isn't hindered by arbitrary rulings of Batman ok or Batman no go?
Were going to get these things eventually but as of now I want them to stay away from the bat family too much because it's too convoluted a process with how DC are being run right now, Batman stuff is over exposed and restricts other properties by hogging the lime light, and DC needs to remember things other than Batman/Superman and their ilk can sell.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer1682 on Jun 8, 2018 18:45:22 GMT
I just think DC for 30 years has put way too much focus on Batman to the point they created their own problem, Batman eclipses DC as a brand, atleast in America, so they should try and continue to give their other titles and characters their own platforms, DC already oversaturates their animated films with the batfamily so why not just keep doing that as it is working use the time to establish a bunch of their other characters whilst having 1 or 2 properties about the batfamily or featuring them in play. I mean personally what with WB/DC having half the in development projects about Batman or the Bat-Family I don't want every other TV show following along also, especially with DC's current hands on hands off hands on hands off approach of treating their IP's like hot potatoes, and any Bat related project is going to have the problem of how do you tell these stories if any given season the ability to actually tell their stories fully is or isn't hindered by arbitrary rulings of Batman ok or Batman no go? Were going to get these things eventually but as of now I want them to stay away from the bat family too much because it's too convoluted a process with how DC are being run right now, Batman stuff is over exposed and restricts other properties by hogging the lime light, and DC needs to remember things other than Batman/Superman and their ilk can sell. I have mixed feelings about that, because on the one hand I don't disagree; Batman had been DC' golden boy to the exclusion of anyone else, save Superman, and even Superman has had a harder time getting stuff off the ground, ironically, than Batman has. But on the other hand, so much of what has been done that has been Batman related has largely failed to truly plumb the proper depths of the character and done him real justice. He keeps getting boiled down to such superficial characterization, with little nuance and often missing out a lot of what actually makes him such a great character in the first place. I mean, when was the last time he was truly shown to be the world's greatest detective in a live action adaptation? In the movies he's always just this angry, two-dimensional thug who is scarcely any better than the villains he goes after. There's no mystery or legend about him, he's as overt about his presence as it gets, driving around in a fucking tank and doing as little as possible to hide his identity. And when it comes to television, they seem to be allergic to the idea of Batman. I'm ambivalent about the idea of a Batwoman or Red Hood or Birds of Prey tv shows, not because I don't think those characters deserve it, but because the catalyst for those characters and their stories, the person who originated their many of their masked personas and the nature of their family has been largely absent from thorough exploration in live action television since the 60s. As saturated as Batman has been in the movies and admittedly in animation, there's been almost nothing with him as a flesh and blood person on tv outside of Gotham. With Superman there was Superboy, Lois and Clark, Smallville, now some minor presence on Supergirl. With Batman you get a vague reference in the pilot of Lois and Clark, a similar reference at the end of Smallville, more ambiguity on Supergirl, referring to Kara's cousin's scary partner. When they created the last Birds of Prey series, they showed the faintest glimpse of Batman, only to build the show on the premise that he had basically run away and abandoned Gotham. And now there's Gotham, a show which initially, if memory serves, claimed to want to shy away focusing too much on Bruce or even to any great extent on having the full iterations of the villains exist before Bruce could become Batman; hence the reason Ivy was originally shown or at least suggested to still be a young girl when the show first started. That soon gave way to indulging in the development of many of the villains and even Bruce's training without so much as him leaving Gotham to my knowledge. And he is still effectively played by a kid, and admitted by some that to believably make him Batman before the series ends they might do well to recast him. So even now, when we do get Batman on tv, it can scarcely be said that it's even Batman; and as ever, and just like with Smallville, all the stories that makes the character what he is, the heart and substance that has engrained him our culture through the comics remains untold in this medium. And that is something I find incredibly disappointing, because I have dreamed of seeing that for years; and largely dismissed the possibility for the longest time, because no one was doing that on television, you rarely saw superheroes brought to life outside of movies. And now that it's a common thing, Batman (and Superman, among many others) are just too precious a commodity to degrade it with a live action serial....
|
|
|
|
Post by BexxyJ on Jun 11, 2018 14:26:44 GMT
The Admin needs to get his priorities right and remember that this is an important part of the site and I write on here and wherever I go fans are sure to follow.  WTF? You have another sex tape of us that I don't know about? I thought the old one went missing. When was that taken?
|
|
|
|
Post by BexxyJ on Jun 11, 2018 14:28:49 GMT
Down here? What the fuck is he doing here? Better yet why are we down here? What makes him special he gets to be up the top while us peasants have to be down the bottom? I want my name on top of the board. You're a peasant? Surely you jest! You're a quen. No, a goddess! All hail Bexxy! Long may she reign! Damn right I'm the Queen.
|
|
|
|
Post by General Kenobi on Jun 12, 2018 18:05:11 GMT
Wouldn't you rather be an Empress?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2018 12:46:26 GMT
I just think DC for 30 years has put way too much focus on Batman to the point they created their own problem, Batman eclipses DC as a brand, atleast in America, so they should try and continue to give their other titles and characters their own platforms, DC already oversaturates their animated films with the batfamily so why not just keep doing that as it is working use the time to establish a bunch of their other characters whilst having 1 or 2 properties about the batfamily or featuring them in play. I mean personally what with WB/DC having half the in development projects about Batman or the Bat-Family I don't want every other TV show following along also, especially with DC's current hands on hands off hands on hands off approach of treating their IP's like hot potatoes, and any Bat related project is going to have the problem of how do you tell these stories if any given season the ability to actually tell their stories fully is or isn't hindered by arbitrary rulings of Batman ok or Batman no go? Were going to get these things eventually but as of now I want them to stay away from the bat family too much because it's too convoluted a process with how DC are being run right now, Batman stuff is over exposed and restricts other properties by hogging the lime light, and DC needs to remember things other than Batman/Superman and their ilk can sell. Yeah. I can agree with you to an extent with that and DC have put a lot of focus on Batman and not the other characters but at the same time we have never really had a proper adaption of Batman on screen as Stargazzer pointed out - not the Batman who is a hero to Gotham that the GCPD work with, the 'World's Greatest Detective' and the guy who was a team leader for Dick, Barbara, Stephanie, Cassandra, Harper, Tim, Damian, Luke etc that other superheroes looked up to. While I think they should have other superheroes on screen too I want to see a proper adaption of Batman with the other Bat Family characters that made the series so popular for many decades. Warner Bros has always been the biggest problem when it comes to adapting DC characters 'cause they prevented a lot of movies of other DC superheroes from being made and only put through movies of Batman and Superman with a few exceptions of other series like 'Steel', 'Constantine' and 'Jonah Hex' as I mentioned on another thread. They could have made movies of 'Green Lantern', 'Wonder Woman' and 'The Flash' back in the 80s or 90s and had the perfect opportunity to make a 'Wonder Woman' movie in the 80s when Lynda Carter said she wanted to play the role again but they wouldn't give the other characters a chance.
I agree that other superheroes can sell well too but I think they should be going on their best sellers first and 'Teen Titans' should be getting a movie not a TV show. 
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jun 25, 2018 13:07:42 GMT
I just think DC for 30 years has put way too much focus on Batman to the point they created their own problem, Batman eclipses DC as a brand, atleast in America, so they should try and continue to give their other titles and characters their own platforms, DC already oversaturates their animated films with the batfamily so why not just keep doing that as it is working use the time to establish a bunch of their other characters whilst having 1 or 2 properties about the batfamily or featuring them in play. I mean personally what with WB/DC having half the in development projects about Batman or the Bat-Family I don't want every other TV show following along also, especially with DC's current hands on hands off hands on hands off approach of treating their IP's like hot potatoes, and any Bat related project is going to have the problem of how do you tell these stories if any given season the ability to actually tell their stories fully is or isn't hindered by arbitrary rulings of Batman ok or Batman no go? Were going to get these things eventually but as of now I want them to stay away from the bat family too much because it's too convoluted a process with how DC are being run right now, Batman stuff is over exposed and restricts other properties by hogging the lime light, and DC needs to remember things other than Batman/Superman and their ilk can sell. Yeah. I can agree with you to an extent with that and DC have put a lot of focus on Batman and not the other characters but at the same time we have never really had a proper adaption of Batman on screen as Stargazzer pointed out - not the Batman who is a hero to Gotham that the GCPD work with, the 'World's Greatest Detective' and the guy who was a team leader for Dick, Barbara, Stephanie, Cassandra, Harper, Tim, Damian, Luke etc that other superheroes looked up to. While I think they should have other superheroes on screen too I want to see a proper adaption of Batman with the other Bat Family characters that made the series so popular for many decades. Warner Bros has always been the biggest problem when it comes to adapting DC characters 'cause they prevented a lot of movies of other DC superheroes from being made and only put through movies of Batman and Superman with a few exceptions of other series like 'Steel', 'Constantine' and 'Jonah Hex' as I mentioned on another thread. They could have made movies of 'Green Lantern', 'Wonder Woman' and 'The Flash' back in the 80s or 90s and had the perfect opportunity to make a 'Wonder Woman' movie in the 80s when Lynda Carter said she wanted to play the role again but they wouldn't give the other characters a chance.
I agree that other superheroes can sell well too but I think they should be going on their best sellers first and 'Teen Titans' should be getting a movie not a TV show.  See if we were getting just a Batverse show I would be down with it, I just don't want half a dozen Batman themed shows clogging up the works for other heroes, I still fail to get why they didn't do more comic stuff back in the day, the only thing I can think is Superman's BO tanking made them fear the sustained audience wasn't there, then they took a chance on Batman in 89, who is presumably the cheapest big name CBM you can do as he has no powers and most of his villains can be done via make up and little more, even then it cost what $60-70m, sure it made over $350m iirc but still if as a studio your thinking $60m cost & $350m BO being the presumably lowest you could spend and most you could make for a major CBM and that's with your No.1 item maybe you don't figure the reward is worth the risk.
But then seeing how Batman's profitability really came from the merchandising the film generated and why they didn't try capitalising on it with their other brands like a Wonder Woman, and WW would have been a safe bet as you could get the established star to do it and you don't need to worry about sprucing up the effects too much as audiences have an expectation when associated with Carter, just touch up those effects a little and you could make a shit ton off of Wonder Woman even if the film wasn't an absolute BO hit.
The TV thing is a little outside of DC's control as its not till now where geek culture and CBM's specifically have become so viable, DC still had to have networks wanting their shows, now with DC Universe they can just make what they want, also only recently has the tech got good enough we can have proper superhero stuff with the TV shows meaning networks can feasibly make them live action and not go out of pocket to do so, that's why they cancelled Dark Angel back in the day, despite it being a great show and solid if not good with ratings iirc the cost made it unsustainable at that level, which when you think the effects and make up for that compared to 99% of CB shows isn't really on par.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2018 11:45:59 GMT
Yeah. I can agree with you to an extent with that and DC have put a lot of focus on Batman and not the other characters but at the same time we have never really had a proper adaption of Batman on screen as Stargazzer pointed out - not the Batman who is a hero to Gotham that the GCPD work with, the 'World's Greatest Detective' and the guy who was a team leader for Dick, Barbara, Stephanie, Cassandra, Harper, Tim, Damian, Luke etc that other superheroes looked up to. While I think they should have other superheroes on screen too I want to see a proper adaption of Batman with the other Bat Family characters that made the series so popular for many decades. Warner Bros has always been the biggest problem when it comes to adapting DC characters 'cause they prevented a lot of movies of other DC superheroes from being made and only put through movies of Batman and Superman with a few exceptions of other series like 'Steel', 'Constantine' and 'Jonah Hex' as I mentioned on another thread. They could have made movies of 'Green Lantern', 'Wonder Woman' and 'The Flash' back in the 80s or 90s and had the perfect opportunity to make a 'Wonder Woman' movie in the 80s when Lynda Carter said she wanted to play the role again but they wouldn't give the other characters a chance.
I agree that other superheroes can sell well too but I think they should be going on their best sellers first and 'Teen Titans' should be getting a movie not a TV show.  See if we were getting just a Batverse show I would be down with it, I just don't want half a dozen Batman themed shows clogging up the works for other heroes, I still fail to get why they didn't do more comic stuff back in the day, the only thing I can think is Superman's BO tanking made them fear the sustained audience wasn't there, then they took a chance on Batman in 89, who is presumably the cheapest big name CBM you can do as he has no powers and most of his villains can be done via make up and little more, even then it cost what $60-70m, sure it made over $350m iirc but still if as a studio your thinking $60m cost & $350m BO being the presumably lowest you could spend and most you could make for a major CBM and that's with your No.1 item maybe you don't figure the reward is worth the risk.
But then seeing how Batman's profitability really came from the merchandising the film generated and why they didn't try capitalising on it with their other brands like a Wonder Woman, and WW would have been a safe bet as you could get the established star to do it and you don't need to worry about sprucing up the effects too much as audiences have an expectation when associated with Carter, just touch up those effects a little and you could make a shit ton off of Wonder Woman even if the film wasn't an absolute BO hit.
The TV thing is a little outside of DC's control as its not till now where geek culture and CBM's specifically have become so viable, DC still had to have networks wanting their shows, now with DC Universe they can just make what they want, also only recently has the tech got good enough we can have proper superhero stuff with the TV shows meaning networks can feasibly make them live action and not go out of pocket to do so, that's why they cancelled Dark Angel back in the day, despite it being a great show and solid if not good with ratings iirc the cost made it unsustainable at that level, which when you think the effects and make up for that compared to 99% of CB shows isn't really on par.
I think the main reason they didn’t do a lot of superhero movies back then was ‘cause they saw them as jokes and they didn’t think they could appeal to a mainstream audience and the success of a lot of movies in the last two decades has changed that view but I remember when I was younger there was not a huge fanbase for superhero movies like there is now and the superhero genre was very similar to the Horror genre and had more of a cult following despite some movies like ‘Batman’, ‘The Mask’, ‘The Crow’ and ‘Blade’ and shows like ‘Lois and Clark’ being successful in the 90s. A lot of critics used to put down superhero movies too and superheroes and I remember reading articles about how the traditional types of superheroes like Superman and Spider-Man were outdated ‘cause they were too light and weren’t edgy enough and there was also a belief superheroes were only relatable to a small percentage of people that mostly comprised of teenage boys who made up geek culture.
Movies like ‘The Crow’ were largely praised here by critics ‘cause they were dark and edgy and made superheroes relatable and in the 90s a lot of light things in general weren’t popular and it was partly ‘cause a lot of the things in the previous decade were light. Most of my friends who were into comic books didn’t like light superheroes and thought they were lame and they liked comic books like 'Batman', ‘The Crow’, ‘Spawn’, ‘Witchblade’, ‘Youngblood’, ‘Painkiller Jane’, ‘Bloodstrike’, Judge Dredd’, ‘Pandora’, ‘Ghost Rider’, ‘Razor’, ‘The Punisher’, ‘Gen 13’, ‘Cyberforce’, ‘Hellina’, ‘Lady Death’, ‘Evil Ernie’, 'Faust', 'Criminal Macabre', etc and they got newsagencies to order series in for them from America and they were all dark, and violent and some of them had lots of blood, guts, sex and nudity in them. Superman's colourful costume was often mocked for having his underwear on the outside and I think that was part of the reason Tom Welling refused to wear it in 'Smallville' and I remember hearing David Boreanaz got offered the role of Superman and turned it down 'cause he thought he would look funny in the costume. The light costumes were one of the main things that kept them off screen and it wasn't really until Sam Rami's 'Spider-Man' came along and was a big success that was changed. The 'X Men' movies removed them 'cause Hugh Jackman thought he looked silly in the yellow Wolverine costume.
I kinda agree with you with Batman and I would be happy with a TV adaption of the 'Detective Comics Rebirth' series with Batman, The Spoiler, Orphan, Batwoman, Red Robin, Azrael, Bluebird, Batwing, Hawkfire, The Signal etc' instead of having them all in the movies and having another 6 Batman movies but they seem to be holding a lot of them off for the movies. I do want to see movies of Batgirl, Nightwing, Birds of Prey, Teen Titans, Batwoman and Red Hood and the Outlaws though and Batgirl and Birds of Prey are the two DC movies I am looking forward to the most. 
|
|
|
|
Post by General Kenobi on Jul 1, 2018 15:36:30 GMT
I think a big factor is cost. It requires a lot of special effects to do superheroes justice in live-action and special effects are not cheap.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2018 12:19:45 GMT
I think a big factor is cost. It requires a lot of special effects to do superheroes justice in live-action and special effects are not cheap. Oh, I agree. Cost is definitely a big factor when it comes to adapting superheroes to screen 'cause some of them require a lot of special effects but I will never understand why it took Hollywood so long to adapt Spider-Man again when they had three live action TV movies of the character in the late 70s which look very primitive now in comparison to the latter Spider-Man movies but were very successful in the ratings department and the first movie was the highest rated program on CBS in 1977. Why make 'Howard the Duck' the first movie of a Marvel character when they could have made a 'Spider-Man' movie to compete with the Christopher Reeve 'Superman' movies? 
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jul 11, 2018 13:53:25 GMT
Finances and partnerships, Lucas wanted to make Howard The Duck his name carried weight Marvel didn't back then, unlike DC Marvel wasn't owned by a major label, even if they self financed which could have been a huge risk even for a low budget major film and even then that's not taking in finding a distributor and cutting them in on the possible b/o, and with it being a potential one off then if it fails that's a huge hit to the company, as they don't have a possible lower budget film or second major one coming out to offset the cost, and back then you didn't have a near all year peak cinema season, films came out a certain time of yet to make money, so studios were more hesitant to waste their key spots on a CBM and all that.
|
|
|
|
Post by General Kenobi on Jul 12, 2018 11:25:23 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2018 12:32:51 GMT
Finances and partnerships, Lucas wanted to make Howard The Duck his name carried weight Marvel didn't back then, unlike DC Marvel wasn't owned by a major label, even if they self financed which could have been a huge risk even for a low budget major film and even then that's not taking in finding a distributor and cutting them in on the possible b/o, and with it being a potential one off then if it fails that's a huge hit to the company, as they don't have a possible lower budget film or second major one coming out to offset the cost, and back then you didn't have a near all year peak cinema season, films came out a certain time of yet to make money, so studios were more hesitant to waste their key spots on a CBM and all that. You bring up some good points about Marvel Dazz and that is the problem a lot of other comic book companies have now and unless they get finance from a major studio they have to self fund their own movies and that is very risky 'cause if they go on to flop they will lose a lot of money and that could not only set them back but the actual comic book company too. Apart from DC and Marvel which have Warner Bros and Disney Aspen Comics and Valiant Comics are the two which are in the best position to make movies now they have been bought out by studios like Mythos Studios and DMG Entertainment and I think Aspen Comics done it a smart way 'cause they sold half to Mythos Studios and the writers still have control over their characters and a lot of say. DC not having a lot of say over what Warner Bros does with their characters in movies has always been a big problem for them 'cause many of the movies they wanted to make never got a chance to be made 'cause Warner Bros didn't see any value in them and it is kinda hypocritical Warner Bros wants to be involved so much now when only two decades ago they didn't want anything to do with the other characters apart from Batman. The failure of 'Howard the Duck' was surprising after the success George had with 'Star Wars' and 'Indiana Jones' but just went to show not everybody is right for making comic book movies no matter how successful they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jul 24, 2018 13:03:56 GMT
Finances and partnerships, Lucas wanted to make Howard The Duck his name carried weight Marvel didn't back then, unlike DC Marvel wasn't owned by a major label, even if they self financed which could have been a huge risk even for a low budget major film and even then that's not taking in finding a distributor and cutting them in on the possible b/o, and with it being a potential one off then if it fails that's a huge hit to the company, as they don't have a possible lower budget film or second major one coming out to offset the cost, and back then you didn't have a near all year peak cinema season, films came out a certain time of yet to make money, so studios were more hesitant to waste their key spots on a CBM and all that. You bring up some good points about Marvel Dazz and that is the problem a lot of other comic book companies have now and unless they get finance from a major studio they have to self fund their own movies and that is very risky 'cause if they go on to flop they will lose a lot of money and that could not only set them back but the actual comic book company too. Apart from DC and Marvel which have Warner Bros and Disney Aspen Comics and Valiant Comics are the two which are in the best position to make movies now they have been bought out by studios like Mythos Studios and DMG Entertainment and I think Aspen Comics done it a smart way 'cause they sold half to Mythos Studios and the writers still have control over their characters and a lot of say. DC not having a lot of say over what Warner Bros does with their characters in movies has always been a big problem for them 'cause many of the movies they wanted to make never got a chance to be made 'cause Warner Bros didn't see any value in them and it is kinda hypocritical Warner Bros wants to be involved so much now when only two decades ago they didn't want anything to do with the other characters apart from Batman. The failure of 'Howard the Duck' was surprising after the success George had with 'Star Wars' and 'Indiana Jones' but just went to show not everybody is right for making comic book movies no matter how successful they are.
Well now everyone is buying franchises and universes we'll likely see more variety in the future, it may be though we get some high financed "TV" movies made primarily for Netflix and the like first though with limited theatrical runs but so long as it's quality content then who cares, but the ownership thing maybe an issue in some cases as I can see a lot of places wanting full ownership but now creators are more aware of the longterm rewards of owning their shit so some properties still may find it had to strike a balance.
In regards to Howard the Duck I worked it out a little and had Marvel self financed that film the cost of the films budget equalled about 30% of Marvels income from comic sales for the previous year based on average monthly comic sales and average comic prices, and that's not profit but flat revenue, I mean shit a brick that would have been an enormous amount of pressure and faith to put on and into a film about a bloody talking duck,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 11:41:49 GMT
You bring up some good points about Marvel Dazz and that is the problem a lot of other comic book companies have now and unless they get finance from a major studio they have to self fund their own movies and that is very risky 'cause if they go on to flop they will lose a lot of money and that could not only set them back but the actual comic book company too. Apart from DC and Marvel which have Warner Bros and Disney Aspen Comics and Valiant Comics are the two which are in the best position to make movies now they have been bought out by studios like Mythos Studios and DMG Entertainment and I think Aspen Comics done it a smart way 'cause they sold half to Mythos Studios and the writers still have control over their characters and a lot of say. DC not having a lot of say over what Warner Bros does with their characters in movies has always been a big problem for them 'cause many of the movies they wanted to make never got a chance to be made 'cause Warner Bros didn't see any value in them and it is kinda hypocritical Warner Bros wants to be involved so much now when only two decades ago they didn't want anything to do with the other characters apart from Batman. The failure of 'Howard the Duck' was surprising after the success George had with 'Star Wars' and 'Indiana Jones' but just went to show not everybody is right for making comic book movies no matter how successful they are.
Well now everyone is buying franchises and universes we'll likely see more variety in the future, it may be though we get some high financed "TV" movies made primarily for Netflix and the like first though with limited theatrical runs but so long as it's quality content then who cares, but the ownership thing maybe an issue in some cases as I can see a lot of places wanting full ownership but now creators are more aware of the longterm rewards of owning their shit so some properties still may find it had to strike a balance.
In regards to Howard the Duck I worked it out a little and had Marvel self financed that film the cost of the films budget equalled about 30% of Marvels income from comic sales for the previous year based on average monthly comic sales and average comic prices, and that's not profit but flat revenue, I mean shit a brick that would have been an enormous amount of pressure and faith to put on and into a film about a bloody talking duck,
Yes, we will and I am looking forward to that especially with comic book universes ‘cause there are a lot of comic book companies that have yet to have any of their major titles on screen which are very different than the superhero movies we have had so far and a lot of people mostly think about super heroes when they think of comic books but there are so many genres comic books have covered and they have Horror, Action, Crime, Fantasy, Science Fiction, Romance and Thriller series to name a few and many that are a combination of those genres like ‘Witchblade’ which Image Comics describes as a Horror/Crime/Fantasy/Science Fiction/Superhero series. Image Comics has had the most diversity with different genres over the years and they have had Lesbian Romance titles like ‘Sunstone’ which won awards, was highly praised and is under heavy consideration to be adapted into a movie.
Did you hear Netflix bought Rob Lieifeld’s ‘Awesome Comics a few months ago and they are going to adapt the ‘Extreme Universe’ into a series of movies? They didn’t get the rights for ‘Avengelyne’ and ‘Youngblood’ ‘cause Rob Liefeld sold the film rights for ‘Avengelyne’ to Paramount Pictures who are adapting it into a movie with Akiva Goldsman and Rob has kept the rights for ‘Youngblood ‘cause he is said to be adapting it into a movie himself like Todd McFarlane is with ‘Spawn’ but Netflix will have ‘Bloodstrike’, ‘Glory’, ‘Bloodpool’, ‘Supreme’, Cybrid, Bloodwulf, and Kaboom and what’s interesting with that is Akiva Goldsman is adapting them too so ‘Avengelyne’ might become part of the universe if Akiva Goldsman convinces Paramount Pictures to work with Netflix. Bubble Comics has their own movie studios now called Bubble Studios and they will be adapting all their titles into movies.
Big companies wanting full ownership and control over independent comic book companies is one of the main reasons so many successful titles under Image Comics haven’t been adapted into movies ‘cause a lot of creators took their titles to Image Comics instead of DC and Marvel ‘cause they got to keep ownership and control over them and I think the best way to go would be both parties working together when it comes to movie adaptions with the creators and writers of these series writing the movie adaptions with script writers and directors who can find a middle ground everybody agrees to and this has been achieved with some other titles that have been adapted to screen like the ‘Sin City and ‘Sin City’ was co-written, co-directed and co-produced by Frank Miller with Robert Rodriguez and the sequel was too and the movies came out under Dimension Films so it can be done.
Thanks for letting me know about ‘Howard the Duck’ and that is a lot of money Marvel would have lost if they had self-financed the movie themselves but in regards to funding I wonder why some of these companies don’t try and fan fund comic book adaptions under sites like Kickstarter ‘cause the series that sell the most might get a lot of fans donating movie to see their favourites finally get a chance on the big screen. 
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Jul 31, 2018 13:18:53 GMT
Yes, we will and I am looking forward to that especially with comic book universes ‘cause there are a lot of comic book companies that have yet to have any of their major titles on screen which are very different than the superhero movies we have had so far and a lot of people mostly think about super heroes when they think of comic books but there are so many genres comic books have covered and they have Horror, Action, Crime, Fantasy, Science Fiction, Romance and Thriller series to name a few and many that are a combination of those genres like ‘Witchblade’ which Image Comics describes as a Horror/Crime/Fantasy/Science Fiction/Superhero series. Image Comics has had the most diversity with different genres over the years and they have had Lesbian Romance titles like ‘Sunstone’ which won awards, was highly praised and is under heavy consideration to be adapted into a movie.
Did you hear Netflix bought Rob Lieifeld’s ‘Awesome Comics a few months ago and they are going to adapt the ‘Extreme Universe’ into a series of movies? They didn’t get the rights for ‘Avengelyne’ and ‘Youngblood’ ‘cause Rob Liefeld sold the film rights for ‘Avengelyne’ to Paramount Pictures who are adapting it into a movie with Akiva Goldsman and Rob has kept the rights for ‘Youngblood ‘cause he is said to be adapting it into a movie himself like Todd McFarlane is with ‘Spawn’ but Netflix will have ‘Bloodstrike’, ‘Glory’, ‘Bloodpool’, ‘Supreme’, Cybrid, Bloodwulf, and Kaboom and what’s interesting with that is Akiva Goldsman is adapting them too so ‘Avengelyne’ might become part of the universe if Akiva Goldsman convinces Paramount Pictures to work with Netflix. Bubble Comics has their own movie studios now called Bubble Studios and they will be adapting all their titles into movies.
Big companies wanting full ownership and control over independent comic book companies is one of the main reasons so many successful titles under Image Comics haven’t been adapted into movies ‘cause a lot of creators took their titles to Image Comics instead of DC and Marvel ‘cause they got to keep ownership and control over them and I think the best way to go would be both parties working together when it comes to movie adaptions with the creators and writers of these series writing the movie adaptions with script writers and directors who can find a middle ground everybody agrees to and this has been achieved with some other titles that have been adapted to screen like the ‘Sin City and ‘Sin City’ was co-written, co-directed and co-produced by Frank Miller with Robert Rodriguez and the sequel was too and the movies came out under Dimension Films so it can be done.
Thanks for letting me know about ‘Howard the Duck’ and that is a lot of money Marvel would have lost if they had self-financed the movie themselves but in regards to funding I wonder why some of these companies don’t try and fan fund comic book adaptions under sites like Kickstarter ‘cause the series that sell the most might get a lot of fans donating movie to see their favourites finally get a chance on the big screen. 
Heard about the Lieifeld stuff, not sure what it all means tbh as im not aware of those properties, I have admitted before im not actually a huge comic reader my love comes from TV and film adaptations, and im both way to add. & ocd , reading comics is not for me as I get obsessive and collect way too much stuff which I never get around to enjoying, id start every comic from it's original issues get as far in as it took for a new cool character to pop up that gets their own run and id switch to reading that till a new character with their own line came about and so on, and so on...I mean I have wrestling DVD's from CZW, FIP, IWA, ROH, Zero-1, NJPW, ECW & so many more that I brought almost a decade ago that I never got round to watching.
But yeah heard about it, he seems pumped up about it from interviews I saw him give so that's cool, the fucking dude seems like he mainlines red bull and cocaine though, so fuck knows if he is psyched or if that's just his base, either way glad he's getting paid.
In regards to crowdfunding I'm guessing cost is a big deal, I mean in this day and age a few million for a CBM or TV show likely isn't that hard to come by, atleast not till the bottom falls out, but that's hard to drum up with crowd sourcing, also you always need to put the audience into perspective, if you recall on the old board we spoke about how even some of the best selling comics of all time if you break down the no. of issues they made by their reported sales your talking less than an average of 1m fans, which you know not all will donate so it's a risk, also how do you set targets? too low and people get like ah man it's cheap I cant believe this shit, too high and people go man fuck that shit they aint got a snowflakes chance in hell of getting there, plus what company wants to be seen as the people begging for handouts?
|
|