Page 308 of 338 FirstFirst ... 208258298304305306307308309310311312318 ... LastLast
Results 4,606 to 4,620 of 5065
  1. #4606
    Spectacular Member Castling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Ellingham View Post
    Great show. But it's 20 years old, and more importantly its success was built on the shoulders of DC's two biggest brands, obviously.

    Did it lead to a film series? Did the eventual JL film benefit from it in any way?

    Justice league should be a huge marketing IP, like the Avengers, but it only started outside comics in the year 2000, and effectively stopped when the show ended. Again, it's just not a bankable multimedia brand. At least not yet.

    By brand, I'm talking something that's bankable for >$700m in current ticket sales. Harry Potter, Star Wars, Batman, Avengers, Lord of the Rings, etc. It's not in that class.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vanguard-01 View Post
    Oof! Extensive reshoots and a new director? Seldom harbingers of glad tidings for a film.
    He's only designing and directing a few action scenes.
    It makes sense since his stunt team has been working on BOP anyway. Also he'll get no credit for his contributions.

  2. #4607
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    42,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chamber-music View Post
    Suicide Squad sequel starts shooting in Atlanta next month. There will be a Panama club scene and there is a casting call for a central American president role.
    Doesn't DC have their own fictitious Central American President? I feel like they do.

  3. #4608
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanguard-01 View Post
    Oof! Extensive reshoots and a new director? Seldom harbingers of glad tidings for a film.
    Well, reshoots aren't anything to get concerned about. Happens all the time. And whenever there's a report of reshoots (especially if the studio doesn't have a lot of trust), it's always attached to panic-inducing adjectives like "extensive" or whatever.

    The new director could be worrying. I mean, WB's track record isn't great and what little we've seen of the film thus far doesn't fill me with confidence on any level. But if he's only there to shoot action sequences it might not be as bad as it sounds. I forget who's directing BoP but if their strength is in other elements of film making, the John Wink guy could just be there to beef up the fight scenes. That would strike me as "bringing in a specialist as part of the plan" more than "Justice League curse strikes again!"

    I mean, I'm largely writing this whole movie off just based on the images we've seen and I'm assuming this'll be a train wreck unless the trailers and reviews tell me otherwise. But I'm not going to think the whole operation is in shambles because of click-bait news like this.
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

  4. #4609
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,919

    Default

    The DGA rules are pretty clear that Cathy Yan is the director. To call Chad Stahelski the "new director" is misleading and click-baity. At best he's a second unit director or a first assistant director or a stunt scene supervisor--but he can't be called the director in the film credits without Cathy Yan being open to it and without him re-filming a hefty percentage of the movie--and even then the DGA might prevent that credit being given.

    There are loads of movies that use other people, besides the director of record, to direct scenes for the movie--but that doesn't nullify who is the true director. Are we now going to examine every movie and call out each time that someone else does most of the work on stunt scenes, second unit work, and pick-ups--and light our hair on fire over a "new director?"

    I wonder how John Favreau got away with calling himself the director on THE LION KING. Now there's a movie I'd like to see change its credits, because after adapting everything that Roger Allers and Rob Minkoff did, and after what the animation department supervisor created, I wonder exactly what was it that John Favreau directed on the movie.
    celebrating 50 years of 4 beatles crossing a zebra

  5. #4610
    Mighty Member stargazer01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,742

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Ellingham View Post
    Great show. But it's 20 years old, and more importantly its success was built on the shoulders of DC's two biggest brands, obviously.

    Did it lead to a film series? Did the eventual JL film benefit from it in any way?

    Justice league should be a huge marketing IP, like the Avengers, but it only started outside comics in the year 2000, and effectively stopped when the show ended. Again, it's just not a bankable multimedia brand. At least not yet.

    By brand, I'm talking something that's bankable for >$700m in current ticket sales. Harry Potter, Star Wars, Batman, Avengers, Lord of the Rings, etc. It's not in that class.
    I don't understand your logic AT ALL.. Who was Aquaman before his movie? A pop culture joke.

    Wonder Woman wasn't that big either in pop culture, but look now after her well received movie.

    How bankable was the Avengers brand outside the comics before the movie??


    The problem the JL faces was all the behind the scenes drama, the poor management of the DCEU by WB, and how divisive and contriversial the Snyder DC movies were. There wasn't a solid fundation. Compare that to the MCU who at least had all the support from the media, audiences loving Iron Man. The problem was execution not with the characters. Who doesn't want to see a movie with the Trinity plus the others? Many people. The problem is the journey there hadn't been very entertaining for many.

    And you keep ignoring Superfriends. For many kids in the 70s and 80s, that show was it.
    Last edited by stargazer01; 08-17-2019 at 12:16 PM.

  6. #4611
    Post Editing OCD Confuzzled's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Swingin' Above Ya
    Posts
    9,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Kelly View Post
    The DGA rules are pretty clear that Cathy Yan is the director. To call Chad Stahelski the "new director" is misleading and click-baity. At best he's a second unit director or a first assistant director or a stunt scene supervisor--but he can't be called the director in the film credits without Cathy Yan being open to it and without him re-filming a hefty percentage of the movie--and even then the DGA might prevent that credit being given.

    There are loads of movies that use other people, besides the director of record, to direct scenes for the movie--but that doesn't nullify who is the true director. Are we now going to examine every movie and call out each time that someone else does most of the work on stunt scenes, second unit work, and pick-ups--and light our hair on fire over a "new director?"

    I wonder how John Favreau got away with calling himself the director on THE LION KING. Now there's a movie I'd like to see change its credits, because after adapting everything that Roger Allers and Rob Minkoff did, and after what the animation department supervisor created, I wonder exactly what was it that John Favreau directed on the movie.
    The article couldn't be more specific. They just said he's hired as an action director to personally oversee some new action scenes with just the second unit.

    The bolded part is key here pointing towards BoP reshoots not being as big a deal as some movie reshoots in the past like Suicide Squad (which required the director and first unit to return) and Justice League, which not only had Whedon working with a returning first unit, but he also received writing credits (the WGA guidelines state that in order to receive a writing credit on a film, the writer must contribute to at least 33% or roughly 1/3rd of the script, meaning JL underwent some serious retooling).

    Doesn't seem to be the case here.

  7. #4612
    Resident of The Djalia Blind Wedjat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stargazer01 View Post
    I don't understand your logic AT ALL.. Who was Aquaman before his movie? A pop culture joke.

    Wonder Woman wasn't that big either in pop culture, but look now after her well received movie.

    How bankable was the Avengers brand outside the comics before the movie??


    The problem the JL faces was all the behind the scenes drama, the poor management of the DCEU by WB, and how divisive and contriversial the Snyder DC movies were. There wasn't a solid fundation. Compare that to the MCU who at least had all the support from the media, audiences loving Iron Man. The problem was execution not with the characters. Who doesn't want to see a movie with the Trinity plus the others? Many people. The problem is the journey there hadn't been very entertaining for many.

    And you keep ignoring Superfriends. For many kids in the 70s and 80s, that show was it.
    Agree with everything you're saying except for the bolded. Wonder Woman was a massive pop culture icon before the DCEU.

  8. #4613
    Standing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    11,919

    Default

    Wonder Woman was a case where everyone knew that she was a big star except the people who controlled her fate. To give them credit, they did try many times to get a Wonder Woman movie or TV show into production, but all these efforts failed in the end. Yet, I think if they really believed that they could make a lot of money from the enterprise then they would have tried harder. I think it was that old bias against female led movies that kept WW off the big screen for so long. But I don't think they have really learned that lesson yet. Wonder Woman seems to be a character who succeeds despite everyone involved trying to screw up her comics, TV shows and movies.
    celebrating 50 years of 4 beatles crossing a zebra

  9. #4614
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Kelly View Post
    Wonder Woman was a case where everyone knew that she was a big star except the people who controlled her fate. To give them credit, they did try many times to get a Wonder Woman movie or TV show into production, but all these efforts failed in the end. Yet, I think if they really believed that they could make a lot of money from the enterprise then they would have tried harder. I think it was that old bias against female led movies that kept WW off the big screen for so long. But I don't think they have really learned that lesson yet. Wonder Woman seems to be a character who succeeds despite everyone involved trying to screw up her comics, TV shows and movies.
    This. Wonder Woman is one of the biggest iconic fictional women in pop culture. People all over the world knew who she was long before Gal Gadot got a movie. Even suggesting anything else is just showing a crazy lack of knowledge about pop culture and Diana's history and importance there.

    I think the movie succeeded only because WB didn't think it would. I believe they got brow beat into finally doing the film, tossed a (comparatively) small budget at it, and then wrote it off as a loss they could claim on taxes and forgot all about it.....until the BO started coming in. I dont think it was until that moment that WB finally realized what the rest of us have always known; Diana is one of the best characters in fiction and could be a gold mine if her handlers gave a sh*t.

    My concern now is that WB will stick their fingers into the sequel in an attempt to "fix" whatever imaginary problems they see, and WW84 will be a pile of crap because of their meddling.
    Higher, Faster, Further....More.

    Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow!

    Bridge Four!

  10. #4615
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    42,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    This. Wonder Woman is one of the biggest iconic fictional women in pop culture. People all over the world knew who she was long before Gal Gadot got a movie. Even suggesting anything else is just showing a crazy lack of knowledge about pop culture and Diana's history and importance there.

    I think the movie succeeded only because WB didn't think it would. I believe they got brow beat into finally doing the film, tossed a (comparatively) small budget at it, and then wrote it off as a loss they could claim on taxes and forgot all about it.....until the BO started coming in. I dont think it was until that moment that WB finally realized what the rest of us have always known; Diana is one of the best characters in fiction and could be a gold mine if her handlers gave a sh*t.

    My concern now is that WB will stick their fingers into the sequel in an attempt to "fix" whatever imaginary problems they see, and WW84 will be a pile of crap because of their meddling.
    Hey, they got the Animated Feature guy to produce Wonder Woman: Bloodlines, so they're doing something right in my opinion .

  11. #4616
    Mighty Member stargazer01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,742

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blind Wedjat View Post
    Agree with everything you're saying except for the bolded. Wonder Woman was a massive pop culture icon before the DCEU.
    She was massive? ok, I guess I lacked the information regarding that. I now her TV show from the 70s was very popular and made her a household name, but she didn't have anything mainstream besides that or animation for decades. I also don't know how big she was in merch before her movie. I really don't remember seeing much about her in popular culture. Maybe I just didn't see or hear it. She wasn't an unknown for sure, though.

  12. #4617
    Post Editing OCD Confuzzled's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Swingin' Above Ya
    Posts
    9,492

    Default

    Never forget that before Wonder Woman released, DC Comics willingly allowed the first panel on this page to be included in a major event comic:



    That and the ribbing of her classic origin (which has been done away completely now) shows how much they thought of Diana's viability before Patty Jenkins and Gal Gadot destroyed the box office.

  13. #4618
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    42,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Confuzzled View Post
    Never forget that before Wonder Woman released, DC Comics willingly allowed the first panel on this page to be included in a major event comic:



    That and the ribbing of her classic origin (which has been done away completely now) shows how much they thought of Diana's viability before Patty Jenkins and Gal Gadot destroyed the box office.
    Harley shilling is still a thing though...

  14. #4619
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Confuzzled View Post
    Never forget that before Wonder Woman released, DC Comics willingly allowed the first panel on this page to be included in a major event comic:



    That and the ribbing of her classic origin (which has been done away completely now) shows how much they thought of Diana's viability before Patty Jenkins and Gal Gadot destroyed the box office.
    Itís a joke from a joke character. I truly donít understand my peers

  15. #4620
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    This. Wonder Woman is one of the biggest iconic fictional women in pop culture. People all over the world knew who she was long before Gal Gadot got a movie. Even suggesting anything else is just showing a crazy lack of knowledge about pop culture and Diana's history and importance there.

    I think the movie succeeded only because WB didn't think it would. I believe they got brow beat into finally doing the film, tossed a (comparatively) small budget at it, and then wrote it off as a loss they could claim on taxes and forgot all about it.....until the BO started coming in. I dont think it was until that moment that WB finally realized what the rest of us have always known; Diana is one of the best characters in fiction and could be a gold mine if her handlers gave a sh*t.

    My concern now is that WB will stick their fingers into the sequel in an attempt to "fix" whatever imaginary problems they see, and WW84 will be a pile of crap because of their meddling.
    If you think most studios don’t have a rough idea of what films will do well or not before they open then I have a bridge to sell you in Gotham City.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •