Why has WB struggled with Superman on the big screen?

[stargazer01]

So to the question, Why has WB struggled with Superman (aka the most iconic superhero in the world) on the big screen?

Because they overthink it. They try to make him more complicated than he is.

This is a great podcast regarding the Cavill/WB drama. It starts at 35 min mark:

https://twitter.com/zakiscorner/stat...93359052349440

[Sacred Knight]

Are you aware of how much the Superman legacy is worth?

Completely irrelevant to the content of what I was challenging. The poster said no one but us silly comic book forum folk were believing they were shelving Superman for the time being. Well, quite a few sources believe just that and reported it. If they didn't and didn't report it, no one would be having this conversation right now.

[mrbrklyn]

Completely irrelevant to the content of what I was challenging.

ok - you are right.

[mrbrklyn]

Now, just to tell you something so you should know so you can have perspective. Warner Brothers is a billion dollar corperation that was so big that it swallowed AOL whole, a company at the time about as big as gogole, in its heyday and then spit them out. They do whatever they want to do and they are very good at it. Superman is a Trade Marked intellectual property they own worth billions. Its anual sales in licnesing alone is larger than companies you would think of as big as Lexcorp. It has existed since the dawn of the media revolution, in the time of your grandparents and great grandparents. They are not going to stop making Superman movies (and TV shows and comics and books and cartoons etc etc). And they are not going to replace it with Supergirl. They will supliment it. That they will do. They will kill Superman. And then bring him back. They will make 100 million dolalars on what you would think are bad movies, and then produce the next one, which will have a 100 million box office and then tied in licensing. They will also not consult with one of their actors on how to handle their billion dollar property, nor should they.

They will not come to this Comicbook forum and make boardroom decisions on how to run their business. No - they will not do that. Now if they are smart, they will come and listen, but the kind of gossip mongering and hype that is hystreria, they will ignore. They can hire Weadon and hire him back a dozen times. Or they can just get sick of him and hire Steven Speilberg.. if he is still making movies. Or they will use there own home talent if they want.


My point that I am trying to get through, unsuccessfully, is that while it is fun to track all these things, and fun to follow the presumed drama of studio politics, one has to be a little humble in understanding that Superman and DC characters have been produced since the 1940's, and they will continue to be produced long after you and I are dead.

They know this, and they don't really care is Cavill quits. They own Superman and they will can any actor that protays him, and find another actor, and in ten years, no one will remember. They are definitely not going to replace Superman with Supergirl, and their legal department would never permit is.

They would love, however, to string you along and sell you a blockbuster Supergirl movie. The last one was a flop.

[JAK]

People spend to much time reading People Magazine. Warner Bros cares about the characters and movie studios and the creative types are fired all the time.

Caring about the monetary value in something and actually caring about it are two very different things. I believe they care in the former sense, not so much the latter.

To say the movies didn't make money is not right. I work for Warner and they made a tidy profit from the Justice League and the Superman Batman movies. It is hard to know how something will translate onto the silver screen well until you try. The Green lantern movies were flat and the prescreenings thought it would do well and it was run by the comics division. Cavill was probably a bad choice to play Superman, and this was kicked around. But his opinion is no more than any other fan. The vitriolic response by fans here probably matter more than anything Henry Cavill has to say.

Well, I'll give you this: I'm glad Snyder is gone, but tell the rest of WB to stop learning the wrong lessons from mistakes (not that they care, but might as well). I'm sure JL and BvS did make WB a good amount of money. If it was really satisfactory, those people wouldn't be fired and there wouldn't be such buzz about a change in direction. We'd be hearing about Zach Snyder's next triumph and I'd be b*+ching about what it's doing to the character.

Cavill is a fine choice. The failures of the DCEU do *not* fall on him. If anything, he's a reason it didn't tank faster.

Also (totally unreleated), three words I'd give anybody from WB: Golden Age Superman. Just sayin'.

As far as the chest pounding and vulgar language, nobody cares. Teens hangout around and complain and moan on the internet about movies - Story at 7PM.

Nobody cares, and yet... here you are? All joking aside, I'll refer you to Sacred Night's thought, which mostly mirrors my own:

Yet lots of sources are reporting that's exactly what WB is pondering doing. If this ends up incorrect its not our fault, we're not the ones making this up.

There is no attact on Cavill. I don't care about him at all. There is my observation that his opinion on future Superman movies is meaningless. If he is an actual fan then it is a little bit more than meaningless, but not much more.

He is the current "face" of Superman, his words and actions mean a good deal on some level. Even more than, say, some of the bad press about Affleck around the time of the movies could have meant for their perception. His response, a fun video with a Superman toy, went around the world. If he opened up and just bared all, it'd have quite an impact. That's not meaningless. It could be a job for WB's legal department, but it's not meaningless.

As for "no attack"... are you sure? Because if I *really* don't care about something, I don't talk anything like you've been - I reserve that kind of talk for something I "don't care" to urinate on if they were on fire. lol I have more balanced words for Snyder than you've had for Cavill, and much of what he brought to the table infuriates me.

Are you aware of how much the Superman legacy is worth?

Yes. A good deal more than the care it's seemingly been given.

----
And I want to be clear on something, in all sincerity: all the complaining I do is out of passion for these characters and their stories. I want these properties to succeed and I want these characters all getting their due. And it's frustrating to watch a company - that should have had it in the bag a long time ago - make the choices they do and thus be forced to rush, play catch-up, start over, etc. I could/can see the results coming, sometimes faster than I anticipate (see JL's box office, I thought that'd be the "last safety blanket") and that's just crazy because I should be the one going "well, I didn't think that'd work, but wow, they pay those guys for a reason." I *was* that guy around Rebirth/Reborn, and it's why I'm a current comic reader/buyer again. I want that optimism in the cinematic versions, but when it comes to Superman.. I just don't have it. And, much as I could go on for a day (who am I kidding? a month..) about what's wrong with MoS and BvS, losing Henry as Superman would change my opinion for the worse, not the better.

What's an example of better? I'd say hiring someone who thinks like this guy - seriously, this re-write is genius so far:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfsHiP6z9wg (part 1)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il3hibcOhwY (part 2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuXhU9ipWPk (part 3)

[mrbrklyn]

https://twitter.com/zakiscorner/stat...93359052349440

FWIW, I don't do twitter.

[mrbrklyn]

He is the current "face" of Superman, his words and actions mean a good deal on some level. Even more than, say, some of the bad press about Affleck around the time of the movies could have meant for their perception. His response, a fun video with a Superman toy, went around the world. If he opened up and just bared all, it'd have quite an impact. That's not meaningless. It could be a job for WB's legal department, but it's not meaningless.

Not much really. You have different branches in the corperation and it might matter to some people close to the creative team and their immediate bosses, but overall, they don't really care and the amount of the public that cares is even less.

People decide on a Sunday morning to take the kids out to the movies that afternoon. I quick lookup on Fathom or whatever, and they see Superman, Red, Blue, Yellow... great. They grab the kids and go out to the movies and buy popcorn.

All this heart ache is reduced to a small subset of the total audience. There is a lot of media. Some of it is good, some of it is bad. People keep watching anyway. This is why I made a thread wondering how important is good writing. What is most important is the consistency of the product. As long as it is Superman, and Lois, they will likely come out to the movies.

[mrbrklyn]

There is no attact on Cavill. I don't care about him at all. There is my observation that his opinion on future Superman movies is meaningless. If he is an actual fan then it is a little bit more than meaningless, but not much more.
He is the current "face" of Superman, his words and actions mean a good deal on some level. Even more than, say, some of the bad press about Affleck around the time of the movies could have meant for their perception. His response, a fun video with a Superman toy, went around the world. If he opened up and just bared all, it'd have quite an impact. That's not meaningless. It could be a job for WB's legal department, but it's not meaningless.

I actually ment to say here the opposite of what I wrote. As a fan, his opinion is a little more important.... but not much more.

[JAK]

Not much really. You have different branches in the corperation and it might matter to some people close to the creative team and their immediate bosses, but overall, they don't really care and the amount of the public that cares is even less.

People decide on a Sunday morning to take the kids out to the movies that afternoon. I quick lookup on Fathom or whatever, and they see Superman, Red, Blue, Yellow... great. They grab the kids and go out to the movies and buy popcorn.

All this heart ache is reduced to a small subset of the total audience. There is a lot of media. Some of it is good, some of it is bad. People keep watching anyway. This is why I made a thread wondering how important is good writing. What is most important is the consistency of the product. As long as it is Superman, and Lois, they will likely come out to the movies.

I don't know... I think it means more than some may think, and will continue to mean more as we become more inter-connected virtually/etc. It depends on what's said, though. Compare Henry's response to what's going on at Disney/Marvel over Guardians 3, for instance.

Good writing isn't the only thing, but I do feel it's important. If just putting any version of the characters on a screen was enough, then they wouldn't keep changing directions/etc like they have been. And JL's box office would have been on par with Avengers/etc. Now, I'm not saying it has to, being an independent artist I know that lucrative is just fine without it being "did it sell like x artist's #1 single" lucrative. But I do think there are lines that break the "anything with an S/Bat on it will sell" logic, and WB found a decent number of them from MoS to JL.

[mrbrklyn]

I don't know... I think it means more than some may think, and will continue to mean more as we become more inter-connected virtually/etc. It depends on what's said, though. Compare Henry's response to what's going on at Disney/Marvel over Guardians 3, for instance.

Good writing isn't the only thing, but I do feel it's important. If just putting any version of the characters on a screen was enough, then they wouldn't keep changing directions/etc like they have been. And JL's box office would have been on par with Avengers/etc. Now, I'm not saying it has to, being an independent artist I know that lucrative is just fine without it being "did it sell like x artist's #1 single" lucrative. But I do think there are lines that break the "anything with an S/Bat on it will sell" logic, and WB found a decent number of them from MoS to JL.

I started out with this thread in agreement that the Movies are not great, and that IMO, they need to simplify that stories and the character and stick to the basics of Superman being Super. ie: Like Max Fleisher.

But then I stumbled on this thread about Cavill talking and quiting and I just making the point that WB don't care for a minute about what Cavill thinks, if they disagree. People I think are just so into the gossip that they lose prespective.

[JAK]

I started out with this thread in agreement that the Movies are not great, and that IMO, they need to simplify that stories and the character and stick to the basics of Superman being Super. ie: Like Max Fleisher.

No argument there - I'd love to see that. I think some modernizing *can* work very well, it just needs more care in the execution (not to mention a sense of balance).

But then I stumbled on this thread about Cavill talking and quiting and I just making the point that WB don't care for a minute about what Cavill thinks, if they disagree. People I think are just so into the gossip that they lose prespective.

I also agree here, they very likely don't care. It's my opinion that (given my impression of him in interviews/etc and judging body language and such when discussing the character) they *should*, not that they *do* (as I have no idea). And what happens in the next weeks, if these rumors of him leaving were or are anything to speak of at all, will tell us whether they care or not, and to what degree.

It's true that people can lose perspective in the face of some gossip, but the reaction is also a sign of what/who those people connect with or feel a connection with in a particular franchise. While not the "be-all/end-all" by any means, having enough of a sense of that from a large enough group of people is still a fairly useful bit of data for a company to use in their decision making - one would think, anyway.

[mrbrklyn]

No argument there - I'd love to see that. I think some modernizing *can* work very well, it just needs more care in the execution (not to mention a sense of balance).



I also agree here, they very likely don't care. It's my opinion that (given my impression of him in interviews/etc and judging body language and such when discussing the character) they *should*, not that they *do* (as I have no idea). And what happens in the next weeks, if these rumors of him leaving were or are anything to speak of at all, will tell us whether they care or not, and to what degree.

It's true that people can lose perspective in the face of some gossip, but the reaction is also a sign of what/who those people connect with or feel a connection with in a particular franchise. While not the "be-all/end-all" by any means, having enough of a sense of that from a large enough group of people is still a fairly useful bit of data for a company to use in their decision making - one would think, anyway.

Maybe, but I doubt this actor has any positive contriubtion to be made to the improvement of the movies. Seriously...

the last thing they need is that. They hired him as an actor and he should do that. What they need is an individual who has experience in Movie prodcution to produce a firm vision of the character in a simlified and accessable way. Who that is, I don't know but it is not Henry Cavill. It is not Jim Lee either.

They should talk to the producers of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow which was the great Superman movie WB never made.

[Carabas]

They are employees.

No, they actually are not employees. That is not what the work "employee" means at all.

[JAK]

Maybe, but I doubt this actor has any positive contriubtion to be made to the improvement of the movies. Seriously...

the last thing they need is that. They hired him as an actor and he should do that. What they need is an individual who has experience in Movie prodcution to produce a firm vision of the character in a simlified and accessable way. Who that is, I don't know but it is not Henry Cavill.

He may not be the best choice, to that I couldn't say who either, but via all we've seen on and off-screen, imo he's shown an understanding of the character the WB has yet to show, and seems eager to be involved. It seems a least a step up from where they are now; he certainly couldn't mess it up past where it currently stands. I'm not saying I'd put him in charge of everything, either - just let him be one voice in the group when suggesting the character's actions in places during the process. Maybe it's just me, but during some of the worst lines in BvS, I could just feel that he seemed as uncomfortable saying them as I was hearing them.

It is not Jim Lee either.

That's the truth. No offense intended to him at all, but no. And not Johns, though he'd be somewhat better. I'd love to see the Triangle Era team assist in taking a crack at it, but that's the fanboy in me talking...even if I kinda think that fanboy is at least half right.

They should talk to the producers of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow which was the great Superman movie WB never made.

I'll have to watch that again to say for sure. I definitely saw the "Mechanical Monsters" references in that one, and loved seeing that.

[Osiris-Rex]

They would love, however, to string you along and sell you a blockbuster Supergirl movie. The last one was a flop.

The last Supergirl movie also came out 34 years ago. And in that same time period the fourth Superman movie was about as big of a flop. So if that is the criteria to go by, they should have stopped making
Superman movies too, because by then no one wanted to see Superman either. Most people liked Supergirl herself in that movie. The consensus was she was just stuck in a terrible movie. The effects and
story line were bad even by 1980s standards. A lot has changed in 34 years. For one thing people are starting to take female characters more seriously and spending the time and money to make quality movies.
And people are more accepting of female characters now. Wonder Woman was a quality movie and a big hit. I suspect Captain Marvel will do well. If the same care in making those movies is applied to a
Supergirl movie there is no reason it can't be successful too.