|
Post by dazz on Sept 1, 2020 7:28:43 GMT
Yeah but DC then upped the budget of TDK close to the cost of Returns, despite Begins not even making enough to cover it's own cost at the box office, TDK only got greenlit after Begins made like $150m in DVD sales, Returns also did insanely well in the home media markets also, DC wanted to make more Batman is all it was so they found the excuse to do so, then spent more on the sequel than they did on Begins even though the only greenlit the movie after it barely made a profit on the DVD's. DC just thinks Batman is the only thing that sells, so they primarily sell Batman, then when only Batman has huge numbers they think it's a sign that they are right...otherwise where is our Wonder woman or Aquaman TV shows? why did we get a Harley Quinn TV show despite Suicide Squad where Harley is just one of the leads did significantly less business than either Wonder Woman or Aquaman? She's a Batman related character and they can add Batman to the series is my guess. Harley Quinn sells a lot of merch, and is essentially a female Deadpool, which means that it’s easy to make a raunchy adult cartoon about her, and those are really popular right now. She was even one of the most popular Halloween costumes of 2016. That’s why she has her own cartoon. I say this as someone who hates Harley Quinn in all her incarnations, but WB’s fondness for her at this point doesn’t have much to do with Batman. She’s basically branched out into her own brand at this point. Also, they could easily include Batman in a Wonder Woman or Aquaman show. They don’t base who gets their own show purely on box office numbers for a single movie. If they did, Green Arrow and the Flash would never have gotten their own shows. Also, a SR sequel would’ve been riskier than a BB sequel. Besides, WB still made a new Superman movie not too long after SR. It just wasn’t a sequel. Wonder Woman merch sales after the movie sky rocketed to like between $500m & $1b, Batman at this point in the last 10 years has fallen between $480m-£1.1b, so Wonder Woman matched Batman in merch sales, no way Harley was making more in merch than that, and whilst the sytle of the show maybe in I doubt it's as cost effective as a Wonder woman show would be, you make cartoons to sell toys, that's what cartoons are for business wise, an all ages Wonder Woman cartoon would sell tons more toys than a R rated Harley Quinn show, and with cartoons what do they normally do? hire voice actors who work relatively cheap, what did they do with Harley Quinn? hire Kayley Cuoco who is a highly paid performer and give her a producers credit also, Harley Quinn was not cheap, but it was fun as shit, but why make that and not a Wonder Woman show which they can make for kids for likely a fraction of the cost? As for Aquaman fair enough, because yeah I think it was mostly the movie that was a hit and maybe not it's merch sales but still it's a case and has been for decades that Batman barely succeeds or outright fails and gets more chances others succeed greatly and may get another chance, if they fail they are fucked, as of Begins 3 "Batman" movies in a row flopped and cost the studio hundreds of millions of dollars combined at the box office, they still greenlight another movie for 3 years later, Superman flops one time and we have to wait 7 years for a reboot, it does ok but not spectacularly and we don't get a sequel, they make the sequel a team up/battle with Batman, it fails, we then get Justice League heavily promoting Batman not promoting superman at all and it bombs also, now here we are 3 years later and the Batman is being made whilst MOS 2? We aint fucking getting it, and Superman moves a ton of merch also averaging over $500m a year in the last 8 years and still no MOS 2. As for adding Batman to a Wonder Woman or Aquaman show, yes but if they did that it wouldn't be a Wonder Woman or Aquaman show now would it, HQ can have Batman and still be a HQ show because Batman exists in her regular realm, she lives in his city, knows his villians, fights his allies and so on, it's a HQ show but most of it's well known aspects are known due to Batman, you cannot really do that with the other two or people would be asking wtf does the Joker have to do with Atlantis? Why is Two Face attacking Themascara?
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Sept 1, 2020 21:13:57 GMT
Harley Quinn sells a lot of merch, and is essentially a female Deadpool, which means that it’s easy to make a raunchy adult cartoon about her, and those are really popular right now. She was even one of the most popular Halloween costumes of 2016. That’s why she has her own cartoon. I say this as someone who hates Harley Quinn in all her incarnations, but WB’s fondness for her at this point doesn’t have much to do with Batman. She’s basically branched out into her own brand at this point. Also, they could easily include Batman in a Wonder Woman or Aquaman show. They don’t base who gets their own show purely on box office numbers for a single movie. If they did, Green Arrow and the Flash would never have gotten their own shows. Also, a SR sequel would’ve been riskier than a BB sequel. Besides, WB still made a new Superman movie not too long after SR. It just wasn’t a sequel. Wonder Woman merch sales after the movie sky rocketed to like between $500m & $1b, Batman at this point in the last 10 years has fallen between $480m-£1.1b, so Wonder Woman matched Batman in merch sales, no way Harley was making more in merch than that, and whilst the sytle of the show maybe in I doubt it's as cost effective as a Wonder woman show would be, you make cartoons to sell toys, that's what cartoons are for business wise, an all ages Wonder Woman cartoon would sell tons more toys than a R rated Harley Quinn show, and with cartoons what do they normally do? hire voice actors who work relatively cheap, what did they do with Harley Quinn? hire Kayley Cuoco who is a highly paid performer and give her a producers credit also, Harley Quinn was not cheap, but it was fun as shit, but why make that and not a Wonder Woman show which they can make for kids for likely a fraction of the cost? As for Aquaman fair enough, because yeah I think it was mostly the movie that was a hit and maybe not it's merch sales but still it's a case and has been for decades that Batman barely succeeds or outright fails and gets more chances others succeed greatly and may get another chance, if they fail they are fucked, as of Begins 3 "Batman" movies in a row flopped and cost the studio hundreds of millions of dollars combined at the box office, they still greenlight another movie for 3 years later, Superman flops one time and we have to wait 7 years for a reboot, it does ok but not spectacularly and we don't get a sequel, they make the sequel a team up/battle with Batman, it fails, we then get Justice League heavily promoting Batman not promoting superman at all and it bombs also, now here we are 3 years later and the Batman is being made whilst MOS 2? We aint fucking getting it, and Superman moves a ton of merch also averaging over $500m a year in the last 8 years and still no MOS 2. As for adding Batman to a Wonder Woman or Aquaman show, yes but if they did that it wouldn't be a Wonder Woman or Aquaman show now would it, HQ can have Batman and still be a HQ show because Batman exists in her regular realm, she lives in his city, knows his villians, fights his allies and so on, it's a HQ show but most of it's well known aspects are known due to Batman, you cannot really do that with the other two or people would be asking wtf does the Joker have to do with Atlantis? Why is Two Face attacking Themascara? Technically, the DC Superhero Girls franchise prominently features Wonder Woman. Again, the Harley Quinn show was made to appeal to the adult animation fanbase, and at this point in time, adult oriented cartoons seem to be more popular than children’s cartoons. For the record, Snyder was the one who decided to include Batman in the MoS sequel. WB didn’t force that on him. He was planning that before MoS was even released. Also, the decision to leave Superman out of the marketing for JL was done because the character was supposed to be dead, and I guess WB wanted to avoid repeating controversy they faced when they showed Doomsday in one of the trailers for BvS, even though everyone knew Superman would be in the movie. As for the lack of a new Superman movie, yes, I find that annoying, but WB doesn’t seem to have any clue what to do with Superman at this point. For whatever reason, they seem to think he’s a character that’s impossible to get right.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 1, 2020 22:14:01 GMT
Are superhero movies in general still capable of surprising people? This. ^
|
|
thenolan
Sophomore
@thenolan
Posts: 778
Likes: 162
|
Post by thenolan on Sept 2, 2020 7:30:24 GMT
Are superhero movies in general still capable of surprising people? This. ^
how can we change that? mcu is even becoming more twin like with every movie.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 2, 2020 8:01:01 GMT
how can we change that? mcu is even becoming more twin like with every movie. I just don't watch them anymore. It works for me!
They would need to go back to a serial matinee approach to bring back a fun element.
Studio management is full of clueless feebs unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Sept 4, 2020 8:16:07 GMT
how can we change that? mcu is even becoming more twin like with every movie. Just make sure they don't follow the Foxmen formula and they should be good.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Sept 14, 2020 21:02:37 GMT
I just watched the Batman trailer and again, like the Joker, it surprised people and push buttons in a good way. the genre will redefine itself. It made me feel as if I was watching Logan's trailer again. there is something special about The Batman trailer. Do you think any MCU movie can have a trailer that will surprise and push buttons or do you think MCU is forever stuck in the generic action packed, color humor driven lane? where we all know, this is the standard type of MCU movie. Reply's should only be from The Batman trailer POV. No coward personal insults please. Yep. They surprised for over a decade. It was pretty cool.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Sept 14, 2020 21:05:24 GMT
Are superhero movies in general still capable of surprising people? This. ^
Of course. Ironman was a big surprise. Guardians of the Galaxy was surprising when it came out. Winter Soldier had some great surprises. So did Infinity War. There's no reason to think any particular genre of movies would be incapable of surprises.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 14, 2020 21:15:36 GMT
Of course. Ironman was a big surprise. Guardians of the Galaxy was surprising when it came out. Winter Soldier had some great surprises. So did Infinity War. There's no reason to think any particular genre of movies would be incapable of surprises. If we mean a superhero movie as in someone in a cape who flies around doing good deeds, then no. It is too limited a genre. In order to "surprise' they deconstruct, which means doing things that have nothing to do with superheroes, like having them stand in a welfare line or merging them with another genre. Winter Soldier is not a superhero movie--it could be an espionage film involving science fiction elements like super computers and brainwashing. There's very little costume derring-do action in it.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Sept 14, 2020 22:35:43 GMT
Of course. Ironman was a big surprise. Guardians of the Galaxy was surprising when it came out. Winter Soldier had some great surprises. So did Infinity War. There's no reason to think any particular genre of movies would be incapable of surprises. If we mean a superhero movie as in someone in a cape who flies around doing good deeds, then no. It is too limited a genre. In order to "surprise' they deconstruct, which means doing things that have nothing to do with superheroes, like having them stand in a welfare line or merging them with another genre. Winter Soldier is not a superhero movie--it could be an espionage film involving science fiction elements like super computers and brainwashing. There's very little costume derring-do action in it.
Disagree. Hancock, Watchmen, BrightBurn, and others have shown it's not limited. Surprise doesn't automatically equal deconstruct. That'd be just one aspect. There are plenty of ways to surprise audiences that don't involve deconstruction, just as the above examples showed. There's plenty of constume derring-do in Winter Soldier. Heck, it ends with a big ol' superhero fight aboard flying helicarriers. It's got a strong plot, but it is a super hero movie with elements of a spy thriller.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 14, 2020 23:08:56 GMT
Disagree. Hancock, Watchmen, BrightBurn, and others have shown it's not limited. Surprise doesn't automatically equal deconstruct. That'd be just one aspect. There are plenty of ways to surprise audiences that don't involve deconstruction, just as the above examples showed. There's plenty of constume derring-do in Winter Soldier. Heck, it ends with a big ol' superhero fight aboard flying helicarriers. It's got a strong plot, but it is a super hero movie with elements of a spy thriller. They aren't wearing the colorful costume and doing good deeds
I am saying the classic image of the costumed superhero--the cartoon character type--it cannot surprise because it was never designed to surprise--it is a juvenile-aimed fantasy adventure. In order to make it have surprises, it means turning it into something other than a superhero story which is what we see now.
They usually make the colors of the costume dull, remove the mask, add all sorts of angst, which is very different from the old classic superhero. I don't think it's the same thing.
Captain America didn't save the day in Winter Soldier--I seem to recall he needed to be rescued. Not super-heroic.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 15, 2020 2:12:09 GMT
Disagree. Hancock, Watchmen, BrightBurn, and others have shown it's not limited. Surprise doesn't automatically equal deconstruct. That'd be just one aspect. There are plenty of ways to surprise audiences that don't involve deconstruction, just as the above examples showed. There's plenty of constume derring-do in Winter Soldier. Heck, it ends with a big ol' superhero fight aboard flying helicarriers. It's got a strong plot, but it is a super hero movie with elements of a spy thriller. They aren't wearing the colorful costume and doing good deeds
I am saying the classic image of the costumed superhero--the cartoon character type--it cannot surprise because it was never designed to surprise--it is a juvenile-aimed fantasy adventure. In order to make it have surprises, it means turning it into something other than a superhero story which is what we see now.
They usually make the colors of the costume dull, remove the mask, add all sorts of angst, which is very different from the old classic superhero. I don't think it's the same thing.
Captain America didn't save the day in Winter Soldier--I seem to recall he needed to be rescued. Not super-heroic.
How didn't he save the day? He changed the chip that had the helicarriers fire on each other instead of the targeted people. Everything after that was to change Bucky back.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 15, 2020 2:15:28 GMT
How didn't he save the day? He changed the chip that had the helicarriers fire on each other instead of the targeted people. Everything after that was to change Bucky back. It's a far cry from punching a bunch of hooligans. That's not an act of super power. Yeah, Superman did that sort of thing too, but it came as a surprise and he still used his super powers to crush Zod's hand and throw him.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 15, 2020 2:19:44 GMT
How didn't he save the day? He changed the chip that had the helicarriers fire on each other instead of the targeted people. Everything after that was to change Bucky back. It's a far cry from punching a bunch of hooligans. That's not an act of super power. Yeah, Superman did that sort of thing too, but it came as a surprise and he still used his super powers to crush Zod's hand and throw him.
So you are saying they have to punch someone to be super heroic? Also, he changed a chip that had airships shoot each other. Killing everyone inside... But I guess punching someone in the face makes him super heroic...
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 15, 2020 2:37:38 GMT
So you are saying they have to punch someone to be super heroic? Also, he changed a chip that had airships shoot each other. Killing everyone inside... But I guess punching someone in the face makes him super heroic... Superheroes--the genre I mean, are associated with super powers and athleticism. I think one of the first Captain America comics has him punching Hitler.
It doesn't show him filling out a letter of protest with the German embassy.
If he had to jump on the side of a flying ship and do something with a computer to change the program, and risked his life and used super powers, then it would fit.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Sept 15, 2020 2:52:44 GMT
So you are saying they have to punch someone to be super heroic? Also, he changed a chip that had airships shoot each other. Killing everyone inside... But I guess punching someone in the face makes him super heroic... Superheroes--the genre I mean, are associated with super powers and athleticism. I think one of the first Captain America comics has him punching Hitler.
It doesn't show him filling out a letter of protest with the German embassy.
If he had to jump on the side of a flying ship and do something with a computer to change the program, and risked his life and used super powers, then it would fit.
Nah, I think you're just trying to dumb down and limit what the superhero genre is. The superhero genre is about as rich and diverse as the comics they come from. It's not simply a super strong guy in a cape punching the bad guy.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 15, 2020 5:09:30 GMT
Nah, I think you're just trying to dumb down and limit what the superhero genre is. The superhero genre is about as rich and diverse as the comics they come from. It's not simply a super strong guy in a cape punching the bad guy. Superheroes ARE dumb. They are not supposed to be sophisticated. They were intended for kids.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Sept 15, 2020 8:09:14 GMT
Nah, I think you're just trying to dumb down and limit what the superhero genre is. The superhero genre is about as rich and diverse as the comics they come from. It's not simply a super strong guy in a cape punching the bad guy. Superheroes ARE dumb. They are not supposed to be sophisticated. They were intended for kids.
This hasn't been true for decades now. Not sure what rock you've been living under.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 15, 2020 8:58:33 GMT
This hasn't been true for decades now. Not sure what rock you've been living under. You think Tony Stark saying he uses his suit for bathroom breaks is sophisticated? Or Fat Thor?
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Sept 15, 2020 16:55:11 GMT
Nah, I think you're just trying to dumb down and limit what the superhero genre is. The superhero genre is about as rich and diverse as the comics they come from. It's not simply a super strong guy in a cape punching the bad guy. Superheroes ARE dumb. They are not supposed to be sophisticated. They were intended for kids.
So you are saying they should be down to your level? I mean, you are arguing for them to be dumbed down...
|
|