Will "The Avengers" influence be able to greenlight a possible "Justice League" film?

Joss Whedon stated:
It’s enormously difficult to take very disparate characters and make them work. And DC has a harder time with it than Marvel because their characters are from a bygone era. Their characters were bigger than we were. They’ve amended that but Marvel really cracked the code in terms of ‘Oh, they’re just like us.’ A dose of that sort of veracity that Marvel really started with Iron Man, I think you need to use that as a base.

non_amos wrote:Don't hold your breath. Competency & common sense ain't exact among duh brothers Warner's strong pursuits.

Apologist Puncher wrote:

non_amos wrote:Don't hold your breath. Competency & common sense ain't exact among duh brothers Warner's strong pursuits.

Think about it: If done RIGHT, and it really wasn't going to be, the Brothers Warner would have BEATEN 'The Avengers' to the big-screen with that 'Mortal' film. Instead, they had a pretty shitty cast, DJ Catrona as Superman? Really??, a weak storyline and a director I really like but wasn't right for that kind of project.

And so, once again, Marvel is going to SHART all over WB when 'The Avengers' makes eleventy-kajillion dollars.

thecolorsblend wrote:There's a limit to how much of that I'm willing to put on WB. They were as affected by the WGA strike as anybody and they needed a tentpole movie for summer 2009. That was likely to have originally been filled by Singerman 2- Boy of Pleather but we all know how that turned out. In their desperation, they figured they could put together a Justice League of America movie. I can't fault their efforts. It was probably the best they could do under the circumstances, short of what they actually did do (ie, reschedule Harry Potter).

If Singer had made the kind of movie he needed to make to begin with, Justice League would never have existed. Conversely, the mere existence of the JLA movie was all but official confirmation that the Singerman "franchise" was dead and buried.

In fact, I'm willing to wager that a 'World's Finest' movie would have stolen a lot of 'The Avengers' thunder, and that is only TWO DC characters....

non_amos wrote:This ain't no lie. As soon as I read that statement, I thought of that scene from I AM LEGEND. I'm certain this scene has been mentioned in the past on these forums. Anyway, Will Smith rides by that theater & what's on the marquee? Essentially the aborted film BATMAN vs. SUPERMAN, that is, in the form of their combined symbols. Naturally I saw that even in the theater but I believe I had also read spoilers going into the film.

Not trying to derail this into a Will Smith forum, no, but that's what immediately came to mind, that image. And just think of the serious bucks that could've been made if 1) it had actually been made & 2) if it had been made right. I can assume we'd have gotten Bale by default. Or would we have? Not exactly sure of the dates on all of that but 'BJ' would've had to have been left out. Could they have used Tom Welling? Not sure. I mean, he didn't want to do a Superman film & cause Smallville to end prematurely so he may not have done that either.

I guess the point is, if the story was awesome & the casting likewise, then that might could've given the Avengers a run for it's money. Now we'll never know. The really distressing part about all of this though is that you'd think WB/DC would get the message after a while?! I mean, it's not rocket science duh WB.

Apologist Puncher wrote:In the end though, they DID green-light the 'Mortal' debacle, even if it was only temporarily.

Money was spent. Scripts were approved. Costumes were made. NONE of this could have been done without the Bros. Warner saying it was "Good to go". But, unfortunately, "good" it was not.

thecolorsblend wrote:All I'm letting them off the hook for is the necessity of it. Besides, it's not like they can reach into their vault of Justice League treatments and concepts and fish something out of there. I think they were just trying to make the best of a bad situation caused by a director (ie, Singer) who was waaaaaaay out of his depth with any kind of Superman movie. Are they wholly innocent? Of course not. But it would never have come to that had Singer cowboyed up and made a real Superman movie instead of that Singerman abortion. By then, WB were facing a deadline to get production started in the midst of a WGA strike. I'm willing to cut them a little bit of slack here.

But as you say (and I seem to have deleted) a WF movie would've attracted a lot of attention and probably would've been the more logical starting place if your agenda is to build toward a Justice League of America film.

Spoiler:

non_amos wrote:This can be done in the comics but why not have a joint effort on the big screen? I mean, we have Marvel Studios now & WB owns DC so what exactly would have to be done to make it a reality?

Apologist Puncher wrote:

non_amos wrote:This can be done in the comics but why not have a joint effort on the big screen? I mean, we have Marvel Studios now & WB owns DC so what exactly would have to be done to make it a reality?

Easy to answer:

DC Comics and all of it's characters are owned by Time Warner, Inc.

Marvel Comics and all of it's characters/Most of the film rights are owned by The Walt Disney Corporation.

Neither company is going to be willing to split the profits, and BOTH would be trying to claim the movie was a success due to THEIR property.

non_amos wrote:You have a point there but what about this? I've noticed films as of late, not necessarily superhero films although I believe some of them were but don't quote me on which ones. Anyway, the point is, I've seen joint credits between, I believe it was duh brothers Warner & Paramount. Those are obviously 2 different entities but for some reason shared credit with each other. It's escaping me for the moment exactly which films & I'm not googling at the moment. So if WB & Paramount can do this, why not WB & Disney? Sure, they both want the whole pie but a film like SUPERMAN vs. THE HULK could be box office gold. JLA & Avengers, that is, if there's ever even a JLA film period. I'm sure other combinations could work. But they would have to put aside egos & do it for the fans I suppose. And the big bucks.

Illustrated by Mark Julian from Allthatsbueno.com:

EDITORIAL: How To Make A JUSTICE LEAGUE Movie Different From THE AVENGERS

Marvel Studios' The Avengers was a game changer, there's no denying that fact. The film has set an impressive number of box office records and looks to be headed for a 3rd place finish on the all-time earnings chart. Quite the impressive feat for a studio that's only self-financed movies for the last 8 years or so. So what can a 90+ year old studio giant like Marvel Comics has a roster of heroes vastly different from DC Comics, so too must Warner Bros. differ their approach to a super hero team-up movie.

Hey Warner Bros., this is your chance to avenge your subsidiary, DC Comics by one-upping their rival in a competition that began 51 years ago. Marvel icon and creator, Stan Lee has made no secret over the years that he looked to DC for inspiration for many of the Marvel heroes we know and love today but tweaked the characters to make them more relatable; an adjustment which has resulted in Marvel becoming the dominant comic book company of the modern age. There is a common saying in the geek community, "DC did it first but Marvel got it right." Well WB, here's your chance to return the favor all these many years later. Marvel Studios has achieved something previously unprecedented in cinema, they've created a shared universe across 5 films and then brought the main protagonists of each film into one big team-up movie; essentially, they've brought the "Big Crossover Event" comic book blueprint to the world of movies. Obviously,the recent success of The Avengers has WB looking hard at their own superhero properties but I believe it must approach the situation from a new perspective. Simply following Marvel's formula may indeed lead to success but greater glory and revenue can be achieved if the focus is placed on WB's greatest comic book assets, the DC villains.

Today, thanks to cartoons and movies, the world probably knows Spider-Man, Iron Man and Hulk just as well as they know Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman. However, I'd be willing to wager that more people know Lex Luthor, the Joker and Hades than say Green Goblin, The Mandarin and The Leader. It's a toss up between each companies' heroes but Warner Bros. has the distinct advantage when it comes to antagonists, especially since the rights to major Marvel baddies such as Dr. Doom, Apocalypse and The Kingpin are held by other studios. Heck, Batman alone has untapped rogues that could provide fertile fodder for 10 more Dark Knight films. Sure, we've seen Lex Luthor in plenty (every) Superman film to date but let's be honest, we've yet to see the Lex Luthor from the comic books (the closest we've come is Smallville) and even still, the likes of Parasite, Darkseid, Braniac, etc. are all ripe for a big screen debut. The Flash has his own unique cabal of adversarial foes and Wonder Woman has the Greek pantheon to battle. The mistake Green Lantern made was going with an immaterial Parallax instead of the cold and calculating Sinestro, a mistake I'm sure will be rectified in the reboot/sequel. In many ways, the villains of DC have the same relatablity as the heroes of Marvel. Often these individuals are flawed human beings who use their abilities for personal gain instead of the greater good. You take Lex Luthor and make him a force for good and you have Tony Stark, give Solomon Grundy a personality and you have the Hulk, Talia Al Ghul a slightly different career path and she's Black Widow and so on and so forth. My point is that there's an opportunity here for originality, a chance to be daring and focus on the villain's story and show a different side of the comic book world to the movie going populace. And what happens when the villains lose the climatic battle against their superhero counterparts? Why, they assemble of course.

In today's society, and magnified a hundredfold in the geek community, the ability to successfully implement an original idea in our "been there, seen that" era is invaluable and is the chief reason why Marvel's currently riding high. The other side of that coin dictates that Warner Bros. will never achieve the same level of success if they simply copy what we've just experienced in The Avengers. We've seen the alien invasion, we've seen the long, meticulous recruitment of heroes, we've seen atypical humor immersed in realism. An end-scene where Amanda Waller shows up to talk to Superman about the Justice League initiative is not going to have the same impact. Take the The Avengers formula and build upon it. Regardless of whether you're purely a fan of Marvel or DC, the fact is ticket sales for The Avengers were roughly the same as those for The Dark Knight. Add a 3D revenue boost to The Dark Knight and it theoretically has the better box-office numbers. Now imagine what a 'dark and mature film' taking cues from Christopher Nolan's movie formula and featuring Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman could earn. Applying Marvel's formula, a Justice League movie can still be original by following the DC antithesis of S.H.I.E.L.D., (maybe H.I.V.E.) in their recruitment of defeated villains to form The Injustice League. Instead of assembling superheroes to defend the Earth from threats that a secret government organization can't handle, a secret terrorist organization assembles a group of super-villains to combat an indestructible force for good, Superman. Apply the Marvel formula but play to the strength of the DC universe. When Superman is unable to single-handedly oppose this organized, calculated and ruthless threat to “Truth, justice and the American way,” he seeks out allies, namely heroes who have dealt with these villains before. You'd be hard pressed to find someone that isn't interested in seeing Lex Luthor, Black Adam and Deathstroke combining their talents to take down the Man of Steel. This method would also attract some big name acting talent who probably have no desire to play a superhero but would jump at the chance to play a menacing, merciless anti-hero (see Hugo Weaving in Captain America: The First Avenger).

Hopefully someone at DC is in the ear of every writer currently working on bringing a DC hero to life. The key ingredient to Marvel's success is that all of the top execs, directors and writers have been fans of the genre and have striven to stay as close as possible to the spirit of the source material. Foregoing a focus on the villians, if WB takes only one lesson from Marvel Studios then hopefully it's the realization that this their subsidiary has endured for decades because even though society has changed, their characters have stayed true to who and what they are, the Man of Tomorrow, a Dark Knight and an Amazon Princess. Perfect the formula Warner!

"Now imagine what a 'dark and mature film' taking cues from Christopher Nolan's movie formula and featuring Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman could earn."

Apologist Puncher wrote:

"Now imagine what a 'dark and mature film' taking cues from Christopher Nolan's movie formula and featuring Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman could earn."

Get the fuck outta here with that shit....

Comicbookfan-V2 wrote:I believe what he (Mark Julian) meant be a Dark and Mature take on a JL film is more likely a referral to the atmosphere that the film be taking place in. In other words... He's refering to the background being dark & mature and not necessarily the characters who are in it except for Batman maybe.

Aleast thats my hunch!!!