Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Early Cut Of Justice League Deemed “Unwatchable,” Substantial Changes Being Made...
Collapse
X
-
WANTED: Dick Grayson SI trousers; gray AJ Mustang horse; vintage RC Batman (Bruce Wayne) head; minty Wolfman tights; mint Black Knight sword; minty Launcelot boots; Lion Rock (pale) Dracula & Mummy heads; Lion Rock Franky squared boots; Wayne Foundation blue furniture; Flash Gordon/Ming (10") unbroken holsters; CHiPs gloved arms; POTA T2 tan body; CTVT/vintage Friar Tuck robes, BBP TZ Burgess Meredith glasses. -
-
-
-M"Opinion is the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding." -PlatoComment
-
^Crib is the exactly right word.
Doesn't it all come down to Wolverine? There's some weird nexus between Miller/DKR/Wolverine that I've always felt was DC/WB's motivator. Like, they always had a character that could match against Marvel in name brand...until Wolverine came along. So they took Miller's Batman, (because Miller legitimized Wolverine as a solo character), and rebuilt him into DC's answer.Comment
-
I wrote a post a few years ago called something along the lines of the men who ruined superhero comics. Miller was at the top of the list. Yes, I liked DKR when it came out, but I can tell you this much. Knowing the effect it has had on the DCU since it's release, I wish it had never been written.Comment
-
^Crib is the exactly right word.
Doesn't it all come down to Wolverine? There's some weird nexus between Miller/DKR/Wolverine that I've always felt was DC/WB's motivator. Like, they always had a character that could match against Marvel in name brand...until Wolverine came along. So they took Miller's Batman, (because Miller legitimized Wolverine as a solo character), and rebuilt him into DC's answer.
Miller may have ruined comics but that's it. I can't blame him for the movies, and I have a hard time even blaming him for anything. I mean, he was just a guy who had different takes on certain superheros, some of which caught on in a very fluid medium: Comics.
Now... movies? I dunno, I look at movies as more of a substantial statement with more legacy (and therefore more responsibility) attached.
Like MRP said:
DKR was a seminal story. But it was meant to be a standalone story, not the story bible for the DCU for the next 30+ years. As a story, it stands on its own merits and is an outstanding work. It changed my view of what comics were capable of. As much as I love super-hero comics, it opened my eyes to a whole wider world of possibilities as a high school kid. But as a blueprint for the DCU, DKR is terrible. It's been people not understanding what it is and what it is meant to be trying to emulate it and make everything else fit in its box going on for 31 years now, and none of them can approach Miller's level in doing so. Miller hasn't done much I have liked in nearly 20 years, but that doesn't take away what he did accomplish. The problem isn't DKR or Miller, it's people trying to crib Miller and his work without understanding what it is they are cribbing or what they are doing.
Um... anyway... it all comes down to the suits, right?Last edited by huedell; Aug 15, '17, 9:42 AM."No. No no no no no no. You done got me talkin' politics. I didn't wanna'. Like I said y'all, I'm just happy to be alive. I think I'll scoot over here right by this winda', let this beautiful carriage rock me to sleep, and dream about how lucky I am." - Chris MannixComment
-
Suits follow the money. If DKR hadn't sold in huge numbers and gotten all the hysterically positive fanboy reaction, set the booktrade on fire with sales of the trade paperbacks when trade paperbacks were unheard of, it would have been just another Batman imaginary story that was well executed. But suits saw the hysteria, buzz, and revenue it generated and said, let's do more of that. So ultimately it comes down to the customers and how and on what they spend their dollars on. Comics fans get the comics their buying habits deserve. Moviegoers get the films their ticket and DVR buying habits deserve. Suits chase money. If fans leave money like a bread crumb trail to stuff like DKR and the grimdark DC movies, the suits will follow that trail and make more of it because they are led to believe it will make more money by the purchasing habits of the customer base. Internet posts don't generate revenue for companies. Open wallets do, and as long as enough fans open their wallets to support things like DKR or the current DC film U, you are not going to see anything different.
DKR emerged in a climate at DC where sales were not good and Khan and Giordano had a mandate to turn things around somehow. Their plan was to get good creators and turn them loose to do whatever they wanted, to be experimental since the status quo wasn't working well. The period is often referred to as the DC Renaissance because it was a period of great change, great experimentation, and helped DC financially emerge from the rut they had been in where they were bleeding off sales because the books they had been producing were not selling well, especially in the direct market which was where the bulk of comic sales had been moving at the time. Suits allowed experimentation because there wasn't a lot of other recourses. Once a successful project like DKR hit, suits latched on to it as a formula for success. Let's make more like that to make more money like that one did. Duplication and repetition is the norm in the entertainment business. Find a formula that works and exploit it by repeating it until the revenue stream form it dries up. Even Miller's sequels to DKR came from the recapture/repeat what was successful rather than from a go create something different place that the original DKR came from, and it shows in their lackluster execution and performance.
If DC had been able to emulate the drive which had created DKR instead of trying to imitate the result of that creative process, they (and comics) would be in a vastly different place right now, but that's not how it works in the entertainment business. Most of it is chasing dollars so what determined success and the shape of future projects is how and on the fans spend their money as long as there are enough of them to generate positive revenue flows. Again, comic fans get the comics their buying habits deserve.
-M"Opinion is the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding." -PlatoComment
-
Places to find PlaidStallions online: https://linktr.ee/Plaidstallions
Buy Toy-Ventures Magazine here:
http://www.plaidstallions.com/reboot/shopComment
-
Suits follow the money. If DKR hadn't sold in huge numbers and gotten all the hysterically positive fanboy reaction, set the booktrade on fire with sales of the trade paperbacks when trade paperbacks were unheard of, it would have been just another Batman imaginary story that was well executed. But suits saw the hysteria, buzz, and revenue it generated and said, let's do more of that.
This started with the overall positive production of the darker Batman (1989).
And it truly manifested as a studio reaction to Batman & Robin as a product, an assessment by the suits that at LEAST reacted equally from the critics reactions of heavy negative ratings if not MORE from them, than the box office receipts themselves which weren't that bad.
but that's not how it works in the entertainment business. Most of it is chasing dollars so what determined success and the shape of future projects is how and on the fans spend their money as long as there are enough of them to generate positive revenue flows. Again, comic fans get the comics their buying habits deserve.
...and with all the quick cash coming in, its just harder for thick-headed suits to see through/sift through the situation to see how much money they're losing with a misdirected film project and how much they are embarrassing themselves and their licensed properties, particularly on the WB/DC side.
Recent stinkers like SS, MOS and BvS don't stand out as much as SR, Steel, Catwoman but they are hurting the brand almost as much, mainly because of (admittedly) what you said about fans' wallets. They still pay decent money to see cringey versions of top tier superheroes in films.
SONY apparently wasn't all that smart rebooting Spidey and going the Garfield route---but they fixed that.
They (FOX) handle X-Men pretty dang good... look at their latest: Logan. it CAN be done by people other than Marvel/Disney.
Wonder Woman? It was cool. But it doesn't convince me everything's is hunky-dory for Justice League or the rest of the DCEU.
No one sucks at this like WB/DC. For decades since Superman II... they basically dropped the ball, and as much as it pains me to say it (as I'm not a huge Nolan cheerleader), I say WB/DC weren't "smart" for getting Nolan involved, I say WB/DC were LUCKY that Nolan came along at the right place/right time to sell their more Millery grittier Batman reboot... because if it was Snyder back then instead of Nolan, they might not have been so fortuitous. Yet, we likely would've seen better Superman movies since then because the whole darker/grittier thing might not have been such an overall permeating juggernaut entity.
I will not believe that WB/DC suits and the investors that work with them, wouldn't be jumping for joy if they took finally blew apart this "Burton to Nolan" realer/darker mentality once and for all, and just did right by their character stable in the appropriate unique way for each unique character/property franchise like "you-know-who" did with their properties.Last edited by huedell; Aug 15, '17, 11:07 AM."No. No no no no no no. You done got me talkin' politics. I didn't wanna'. Like I said y'all, I'm just happy to be alive. I think I'll scoot over here right by this winda', let this beautiful carriage rock me to sleep, and dream about how lucky I am." - Chris MannixComment
-
That said, there's no way Justice League can be worse than B V. S.... I think the suits are being very mindful that there's an audience at the end of the production. I predict... It'll probably be pretty good, but still not MY ideal interpretation of these characters.
Marvel Studios gets picked on (unfairly I think) for making fluff entertainment, but they are dang entertaining, and get closer to the sweet spot than just about any other Superhero films.Comment
-
I feel like your typo here might actually end up being more prophetic than erroneous. I have a very real fear that WB's learnings from WW are going to be "people like DC movies now" - which is NOT what they need to take away from that picture's success."If you take a dog which is starving and feed him and make him prosperous, that dog will not bite you. This is the primary difference between a dog and a man."
- Mark TwainComment
-
And that I believe is where they got stuck.
This started with the overall positive production of the darker Batman (1989).
I will not believe that WB/DC suits and the investors that work with them, wouldn't be jumping for joy if they took finally blew apart this "Burton to Nolan" realer/darker mentality once and for all, and just did right by their character stable in the appropriate unique way for each unique character/property franchise like "you-know-who" did with their properties.Comment
-
-M"Opinion is the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding." -PlatoComment
Comment