The Geek Beat: DC Delays
Filed under: Fandom, The Geek Beat

As a Marvel fan, I do tend to overlook the DC characters in my weekly columns. This isn't intended as a snub, but the simple fact is that I just don't know the finer points of the DC stable. I can give my two cents as to who I think should play Hal Jordan, but I can't really do any more than that just because I'm unfamiliar with all but the basic mythology. (This will inevitably take a chunk of my cred – although if you think that's bad, you should have been at the D&D table when I feebly suggested Adam Baldwin as a potential Green Lantern.) This puts me into a weird position when it comes to Warner Bros and their movie franchises. I can identify with general audiences a little more, as I'm a slightly harder sell. But I also know enough of the characters that I understand just what a tough task the studio has ahead of them in trying to adapt them for the big screen.
That said – what exactly is going on over there?
As of January, Warner Bros was putting all DC properties on hold. The last update we had was via David S. Goyer and IESB.net: "They're going to come up with some new plan, methodology, things like that so everything has just been pressed pause on at the moment. It was the double header of both Iron Man and The Dark Knight coming out, so more than ever I think they've realized, I think DC was responsible for 15% of Warner Brother's revenue this year, something crazy like that, so they realized that comic books, it's become a new genre, one of the most successful genres."
That said – what exactly is going on over there?
As of January, Warner Bros was putting all DC properties on hold. The last update we had was via David S. Goyer and IESB.net: "They're going to come up with some new plan, methodology, things like that so everything has just been pressed pause on at the moment. It was the double header of both Iron Man and The Dark Knight coming out, so more than ever I think they've realized, I think DC was responsible for 15% of Warner Brother's revenue this year, something crazy like that, so they realized that comic books, it's become a new genre, one of the most successful genres."
It's an understandable action. It's one that other studios (coughFoxcough) might be wise to follow before rushing headlong into bad casting and story ideas. The superhero frenzy has been going for some time (arguably since X-Men), and no other studio has frozen in their tracks quite like poor Warner Bros has. In the year I've been on Cinematical (arguably the Year of Geek), they're exactly where they started off – no Green Lantern, no Superman, no Wonder Woman. Sure, you got Batman, but at this point it almost seems like a fluke. It took major studio guts to hire Christopher Nolan and to let him have free rein with the character and his mythology – but in the end, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight was all Nolan. If it was up purely to Warner Bros to decide what to do, we might still be waiting for his return as we are with Superman.
Yet from the outside, no one could have it easier than Warner Bros. They have rights to three of the most successful and iconic characters of pop culture (Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman) and they get to do the most fun and easy chapter -- the origin stories. No matter how godlike and awesome DC characters are, creating an origin story for Wonder Woman seems a lot easier than deciding what she should do in subsequent installments. You even have a mold-breaking model with Iron Man and Batman Begins, where two directors successfully cherry-picked the comics to create their own first chapters. It looks like pretty smooth sailing, but they seem utterly perplexed as to what to do with them.
Of course, I understand that it's easy to judge these things from my laptop. I can't imagine how hard it is to actually pull the trigger on something like The Green Lantern, and wonder if you might be better off just lighting millions of dollars on fire. Hell, Cinematical readers can barely decide how Superman should be rebooted, how can you have confidence in ever winning over millions of fans? I can see how they have let themselves become trapped in an agony of indecision.
But if I was to offer some tentative, uneducated advice – I'd tell them to take a risk. The risks (300, Christopher Nolan, even Watchmen) have paid off in terms of fan and industry credibility. They're riding high right now and with Harry Potter and The Dark Knight, they've got money to burn. If anything, that's where their instincts lie -- look at Jonah Hex. That's a DC property I wouldn't have expected to see out of a studio until they had run the Big Ones into the ground, but it's one of the first DC characters getting shoved out of the gate. It's gone from a "Jonah who now?" to a "I can't wait for that one!" for a lot of people.
So, take a risk. Hold your breath, pick a Green Lantern, and jump. Greenlight (really greenlight) Wonder Woman. Run wild with Supermax. Find yourself another Christopher Nolan. Just go for it. Being risky doesn't necessarily mean being stupid – in fact, if it sounds too good to be true (Halle Berry as Catwoman) then it's probably too terrible for human eyes to endure. In fact, the best thing to do seems to be to hand a Christopher Nolan or a Zack Snyder a lot of money, and just walking away to let them do as they will. It's a matter of public record now what studio interference has done to other superhero franchises, so you know what not to do.
Whatever Warner Bros does, they've got to do it soon. If they want to be the risk taker that makes Jonah Hex and Watchmen over Superman and Green Lantern, I say go for it. Not every studio needs to trot out the icons and with Fox, Sony, and Marvel Entertainment shoving out another character, it might be really nice to have a big player who hangs back from the massive superhero game.
But, if they want to get into it, they've got to pull the trigger. If their superheroes continue in a state of suspension, the studio will completely miss the zeitgeist. Every trend burns out, and comic books are a trend like any other. You may have a few standby characters like Batman that can keep chugging along and knock out a movie every two or three years, but the frenzied assembly line can't continue.
In retrospect, this is a column that might be read as a lot of fan nitpicking and geeky greed. I don't intend it to at all -- in fact, my admiration for Warner Bros has continued to grow over the past couple of years. That's why I'm so anxious to see what they do with their DC cast of characters, because whatever property they tackle, the fans generally win.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-07-2009 @ 3:12PM
Brice said...
This is exactly how I feel. I grew up on the DC side of things, which makes me a bit more biased towards them, but as I've grown up, I've moved towards Marvel because it simply seems that they have figured out what to do.
DC and WB have been sitting around with these major franchises, and they seem too afraid to do anything with them that isn't the "standard" story. Look at all the dead DC projects over at WB, almost every single one was a big risk that they didn't seem willing to take. There's Joss Whedon's Wonder Woman project, Supermax, Superman vs. Batman, and countless others.
WB just needs to keep taking leaps and risks. They have started taking chances with other features (such as Public Enemies, and Sherlock Holmes), but they don't seem so inclined to do it for comic book characters.
Oh, and the first read through of the article, I totally read that as "Harry Potter and the Dark Knight." Now THERE'S a risk.
Reply
4-07-2009 @ 8:36PM
Dan said...
I feel the exact same way as well. Very well said, and it's all true. They've got such a full stable of insanely cool, different, unusual, and new characters that a lot of the public has probably not heard of that they're doing a disservice by not taking new angles, giving some unconventional folks creative control-Whedon, Kevin Smith, even. Remember back in the day when they handed Tim Burton the original Batman? History has showed us that different may not always be the safest play, but it certainly wins fans over, and in Batman's case (both 1988 and now) it was big bucks.
"But if I was to offer some tentative, uneducated advice – I'd tell them to take a risk. The risks (300, Christopher Nolan, even Watchmen) have paid off in terms of fan and industry credibility."
That's something that I've spoken on in conversations with my friends as well, and I could not have said it better. That is the smart play, and that's the advice I would give as well, because if nothing else, the fans WILL remember, and they'll give back.
Reply
4-07-2009 @ 6:00PM
Moo said...
couldn't agree more. WB, other than with Batman, has been ALL OVER THE PLACE with its comic properties. Yes, it would have been good to have a plan, though I will point out that Marvel's overarching plan with its properties converging on Avengers is pretty much unprecedented.
So yeah, I guess i get DC's intent here, to form a plan akin to what Marvel is doing...........but as you point out that ship has sailed. Comics are hot NOW, they wont be forever (sadly for me). Watchmen could be the first sign of that, though I'd argue that Watchmen is a special case. DC has two choices as I see it, since they failed to plan in advance: sit on their properties and agonize over a strategy that will, ultimately, probably be compared to unfavorably with Marvel and will potentially cause DC to miss their window of opportunity completely, or go the opposite direction and take some risks...edgy risks. I can see why studios would balk at that after Watchmen, but to me it's their only shot to get back into the game in the short term.
Reply
4-07-2009 @ 11:04PM
Batzarro said...
Actually, I've grown to hate Warner Bros. over their innabillity to release anything DC related. It's one thing to be carefull, but starting and stopping projects is not being carefull.
Reply
4-07-2009 @ 10:48PM
Douglass Abramson said...
The first problem is that no one at DC has any control over the movie and TV versions of their characters. Warner Bros. controls the rights, but doesn't treat them as one property, like Marvel does, They're treated as separate properties and doled out to producers that have production agreements with the studio. They need to yank all of the properties back and give them to a production unit dedicated to the material, hopefully one with input from DC.
Reply
4-08-2009 @ 6:54PM
DAVID F said...
I grew up reading both and currently lean toward Marvel. The only DC book I picked up recently was John's Flash: Rebirth just outta curiosity. It's easier to bring a Marvel character to the big screen cuz between the Big Two, they're more relatable. Not that you're cousin gets all green when he gets angry or you're best friend can "flame on!" but the psyche and personality of the characters are more down to earth (dude...even Silver Surfer!). One of the problems with bringing such awesome DC characters to the screen is that the most poular ones are god-like except for say....Batman and Green Arrow. What do you do with Superman? Clearly, Singer didn't know what to do with him. He made a good-looking movie but crapped on the script leaving us with a hero who's a deadbeat dad and a story that was basically a remake of Donner's orginal. Like any good movie, it's all about a good script. Another problem is this whole "dark" fad. For some reason WB thinks all comic-related movies now have to be just like Nolan's Bat-flix. How narrow-mindedly obtuse is that? Could you imagine Shazam being "dark"? Yeesh. Nolan made such a success out of his excellent vision of a real-world Batman yet it makes me wonder how a Green Lantern could interact with such a Gotham. Maybe that's the good question: Would any other DC films be in the same universe as Nolan's? Could Bale's Batman be as believable if he interracted with Wonder Woman or Aquaman. Doubtful but....who knows? I hope that DC would take a look at Marvel's big-screen mistakes and successes and hopefully learn some things. One step in the right direction would be getting writers like Geoff Johns, Mark Waid or Greg Rucka involved in creating a script that would stand up on it's own merits.
Reply
4-10-2009 @ 2:58PM
ber said...
What is there to complain abpout really? I can't really fault the approach Warner and/or DC are taking. Warner are the ones putting out the quality Comic Book movies, whereas Marvel have been putting out movies too fast and too frequent, and it tells when you look at the titles they've been putting out.
Less is more in this instance.
Reply