Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 29
  1. #1
    Spectacular Member Banner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    117

    Default Future DC or Marvel movies like Joker?

    The director/writer said he as a general rule doesn't like superhero movies because they are too "loud" (and while not a superhero film, the original director of the Dwayne Johnson version of Journey to the Center of the Earth pulled out because it felt too much of a rollercoaster ride).

    Joker showed that it is possible to make a successful movie that is calmer and less Michael Bay. Simultaneously visual effects are getting both better and cheaper. So why not combine them? A film that require CGI and performance capture to explore a certain comic title, but which is more about the characters than explosions, car chases, alien invasions, epic battles and shooting scenes. Ghost Rider for instance, or Solomon Grundy, Hannibal King (from the 70s), Mister Miracle's life on Apokolips, Etrigan the Demon, Machine Man, Creeper or even Jack O'Lantern (the way he is portrayed in Amazing Spider-Man issues 234, 235 and 236). There are plenty of both major and minor characters to choose from if DC and Marvel should want to explore a different approach. That would actually be closer to the comics I grew up reading that the movies based on them.
    Last edited by Banner; 12-06-2019 at 10:04 PM.

  2. #2

    Default

    Not a Marvel or DC character, but there should be a Joker-style movie about Mrs. Voorhees from Friday the 13th

    "A single mother...struggling to make ends meet while taking care of her special needs son. But when he drowns due to the negligence of others...the world will know her pain.
    "Coming soon...VOORHEES"

    I smell Academy Award.
    "Never place your trust in us. We're only human. Inevitably, we will disappoint you."


  3. #3
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,848

    Default

    Tempest-Joshua Clay a Vietnam Vet who's mutant powers were triggered defending a village about to get massacred.

  4. #4
    Mighty Member Beaddle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    https://screenrant.com/james-franco-...n-movie-x-men/
    James Franco Says Multiple Man Pushes X-Men Into 'New Genre'
    “Our bottom line MO is, how can we push this into new ground? A little bit, but still make it entertaining? [But] what I love about what Simon Kinberg and Fox and the X-Men people have done with Deadpool and Logan — it took a while to get there, maybe 10 years — but they are going to go hard R. And we're going to take this superhero thing and really just push it into a new genre. So we’re working with Simon Kinberg on an X-Men property.”


    https://filmschoolrejects.com/looks-...e-will-hard-r/

    There should be nothing stopping marvel from still making this movie without Franco or Kinberg doing any writing and directing. Marvel/fox already had a vision for joker kind of film with Multiple man. Franco is right that the genre needs to be pushed more as you think Banner. This is what we have now to expect for comic films especially if it is X-Men or Batman related.

    Franco could even make a comeback with this film if Hollywood is ready to forgive him.

  5. #5
    Astonishing Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    A superhero movie made on the cheap (low-budget as in Joker 2019), with a very low-key character driven take is a pretty nifty idea on the whole. But it works for only some kind of stories and characters. IT needs to be small-scale and intimate as opposed to anything grand scale.

    -- Daredevil: Born Again, which is set in the '80s and is a chaotic intense portrait of the lower-depths, and also...Marvel's single best love story in any contained story arc.
    -- The Superior Foes of Spider-Man, which is more or less a Guy Ritchie movie done with supervillains, and it's a comedy, and it features villains on the low-end of powers and gadgets.
    -- Kraven's Last Hunt, almost entirely set at night, in dark spaces, and cramped settings, so you can do this in a very expressionistic style with a lot of studio interiors and shadows, which could control the budget. It's also a very psychologically intense story.


    Generally, low-budget movies (regardless of genre) work best when you have a kick-ass story with heavy character development and psychology to base it on. Most superhero movies put plot over character and that applies especially to MCU. Stuff like LOGAN is the other end of the spectrum. So be like Logan.

  6. #6
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Unfortunately the dominant force that has assisted Marvel on becoming so popular is the very thing that will hold it back from this type of creative direction, Disney. IMO Disney is not going to allow a change in how Marvel films are made until they stop making money as they are now. Truly why would any company change what's successful for them?

    The type of film that pushes the plot more than CGI affects and one off jokes is what you'll get from DC because they have to compete with Disney/Marvel and the best way they can do it now is to aim for a smaller more specific demographic than the family oriented group. In other words " hit it where Disney/Marvel ain't ".

    Eventually, Marvel may be allowed to make riskier content but be prepared for it not to be good at first. I'm not bashing them but it will technically be uncharted territory for them and they'll have to make mistakes and learn from them, pretty much the same way DC/Warner learned recently from their unsuccessful attempts at copying Marvel's success.

  7. #7
    Astonishing Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    Unfortunately the dominant force that has assisted Marvel on becoming so popular is the very thing that will hold it back from this type of creative direction, Disney. IMO Disney is not going to allow a change in how Marvel films are made until they stop making money as they are now. Truly why would any company change what's successful for them?
    Yeah, the Netflix Daredevil show will definitely not be coming to Disney Plus, maybe hulu who knows?

    We also won't ever get an accurate adaptation of Daredevil Born Again.

    The type of film that pushes the plot more than CGI affects and one off jokes is what you'll get from DC because they have to compete with Disney/Marvel and the best way they can do it now is to aim for a smaller more specific demographic than the family oriented group. In other words " hit it where Disney/Marvel ain't ".
    Considering how much money Joker made...not sure if this such a "smaller more specific demographic", my dude.

    Eventually, Marvel may be allowed to make riskier content but be prepared for it not to be good at first. I'm not bashing them but it will technically be uncharted territory for them and they'll have to make mistakes and learn from them, pretty much the same way DC/Warner learned recently from their unsuccessful attempts at copying Marvel's success.
    Mostly they'll try and shuffle it to Disney Plus. The LOKI TV series is the first villain-centric offering they are putting out.

  8. #8
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Yeah, the Netflix Daredevil show will definitely not be coming to Disney Plus, maybe hulu who knows?

    We also won't ever get an accurate adaptation of Daredevil Born Again.



    Considering how much money Joker made...not sure if this such a "smaller more specific demographic", my dude.



    Mostly they'll try and shuffle it to Disney Plus. The LOKI TV series is the first villain-centric offering they are putting out.
    I liked daredevil alot but if they bring it back to any of their platforms I think it'll be more toned down so it can be marketed to kids. Disney is all about marketing and selling merchandise so they would want to market daredevil to be able to sell shirts, costumes, and toys.

    I think Joker was meant to be a niche movie and not the blockbuster it became otherwise it would have had a bigger budget, been marketed more, and Warner wouldn't have split the production costs and ultimately profits 60/40. Additionally, it was an R rated movie which those historically are meant to be niche as studios are cutting out a large age group from seeing it (even though for some reason I saw parents take their kids to see it in theaters).

    With the Loki tv series, I expect them to do an anti hero spin on him tbh, pretty much not making him a full blown villain like he was in the first avengers film. This way he can still be marketed to kids without parents having issues with it.

  9. #9
    Astonishing Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    I liked daredevil alot but if they bring it back to any of their platforms I think it'll be more toned down so it can be marketed to kids. Disney is all about marketing and selling merchandise so they would want to market daredevil to be able to sell shirts, costumes, and toys.
    Daredevil as a property has always tended to escape being an over-merchandised thing.
    -- Do you know how many Daredevil cartoons there are? 0
    -- Do you know many Daredevil video games there are? 1 (a movie tie-in for the Nintendo DS at that).

    It's a corner of the Marvel Universe that has always started at a mid-to-high PG13 and in some cases going to soft-R. The Punisher is likewise a very difficult, and highly controversial character to market to kids.

    Wolverine is the only problematic dude who has been marketable. They get around to it by putting him in yellows, having him fight monsters and sentinels and being mentors to the team mascot du-jour.

    I think Joker was meant to be a niche movie and not the blockbuster it became otherwise it would have had a bigger budget, been marketed more, and Warner wouldn't have split the production costs and ultimately profits 60/40. Additionally, it was an R rated movie which those historically are meant to be niche as studios are cutting out a large age group from seeing it (even though for some reason I saw parents take their kids to see it in theaters).
    Point is there's a huge mass audience for that kind of thing. And taking a low-budget/high-profit return approach is definitely the way to go what with Logan/Deadpool/Joker all succeeding based on that.

    With the Loki tv series, I expect them to do an anti hero spin on him tbh, pretty much not making him a full blown villain like he was in the first avengers film. This way he can still be marketed to kids without parents having issues with it.
    Disney has experience marketing their Disney Villains series, so Loki might fit that mold. He's not the Norse God of Mischief, he's just a Male Maleficent, or a Human Scar, or you know Norse Hades (from Hercules) and so on.

  10. #10
    Invincible Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    28,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    Unfortunately the dominant force that has assisted Marvel on becoming so popular is the very thing that will hold it back from this type of creative direction, Disney. IMO Disney is not going to allow a change in how Marvel films are made until they stop making money as they are now. Truly why would any company change what's successful for them?

    The type of film that pushes the plot more than CGI affects and one off jokes is what you'll get from DC because they have to compete with Disney/Marvel and the best way they can do it now is to aim for a smaller more specific demographic than the family oriented group. In other words " hit it where Disney/Marvel ain't ".

    Eventually, Marvel may be allowed to make riskier content but be prepared for it not to be good at first. I'm not bashing them but it will technically be uncharted territory for them and they'll have to make mistakes and learn from them, pretty much the same way DC/Warner learned recently from their unsuccessful attempts at copying Marvel's success.
    They are probably more willing to stray from the MCU formula on the streaming TV side of things. There's less of a burden to generate a billion dollars on that front. And they probably want to go a bit cheaper anyways.

  11. #11
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XPac View Post
    They are probably more willing to stray from the MCU formula on the streaming TV side of things. There's less of a burden to generate a billion dollars on that front. And they probably want to go a bit cheaper anyways.
    They may however the only place I see it going is on hulu as seeing Disney+ is currently marketed to kids but even that route doesn't seem highly likely imo. I think what may happen is Disney creates another streaming service that directly competes with Apple TV and HBO Max and that's where that content would go.

  12. #12
    Fantastic Member Wandering_Wand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    399

    Default

    DC has plenty to offer in the vain of Todd Phillips's Joker:

    The Question
    Midnighter
    Ra's al Ghul
    Luthor
    Riddler
    Mr. Freeze
    Hush
    Poison Ivy
    Reverse Flash


    And I'd go out on a limb and propose characters like Green Arrow and Black Canary could thrive in similar cinematic experiences. However, one thing to keep a big note of here is that Joker is an A-list villain known across the world (and the list is rather short between both DC and Marvel when we talk truly A-list where they're recognized outside of the heroes they're typically opposite of and can even carry brands). While some of these other characters could do justice with a similar cinematic style on a low budget, how likely are they to be billion burgers even if they're superb like Joker?

  13. #13
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Daredevil as a property has always tended to escape being an over-merchandised thing.
    -- Do you know how many Daredevil cartoons there are? 0
    -- Do you know many Daredevil video games there are? 1 (a movie tie-in for the Nintendo DS at that).

    It's a corner of the Marvel Universe that has always started at a mid-to-high PG13 and in some cases going to soft-R. The Punisher is likewise a very difficult, and highly controversial character to market to kids.

    Wolverine is the only problematic dude who has been marketable. They get around to it by putting him in yellows, having him fight monsters and sentinels and being mentors to the team mascot du-jour.



    Point is there's a huge mass audience for that kind of thing. And taking a low-budget/high-profit return approach is definitely the way to go what with Logan/Deadpool/Joker all succeeding based on that.



    Disney has experience marketing their Disney Villains series, so Loki might fit that mold. He's not the Norse God of Mischief, he's just a Male Maleficent, or a Human Scar, or you know Norse Hades (from Hercules) and so on.
    Those are fair points but I think the other piece of the equation for Marvel to do the Logan/Deadpool/Joker type films is a culture shift from Disney and how they limit creative control of the directors. All 3 of those films were possible because the directors were able to not be stifled on their creative direction. Disney has been known to veto things the directors wanted to do in the Marvel films, like they wouldn't allow certain characters to be killed off or let certain things be shown (Captain America was supposed to be decapitated in Infinity War). Their films up to this point have a particular flow regardless of who is directing, which isn't a bad thing but you can't create films like Deadpool like that.

  14. #14
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wandering_Wand View Post
    DC has plenty to offer in the vain of Todd Phillips's Joker:

    The Question
    Midnighter
    Ra's al Ghul
    Luthor
    Riddler
    Mr. Freeze
    Hush
    Poison Ivy
    Reverse Flash


    And I'd go out on a limb and propose characters like Green Arrow and Black Canary could thrive in similar cinematic experiences. However, one thing to keep a big note of here is that Joker is an A-list villain known across the world (and the list is rather short between both DC and Marvel when we talk truly A-list where they're recognized outside of the heroes they're typically opposite of and can even carry brands). While some of these other characters could do justice with a similar cinematic style on a low budget, how likely are they to be billion burgers even if they're superb like Joker?
    Personally what I would like to see from DC is the villian movies be like Joker (ie tell their side of the story) and then do a crossover with the hero that they normally fight as each final film. Example see shazam 1 & 2 and black adam 1 & 2 then see black adam vs shazam as their final film.

    I think DC can do this as they've written their villains very well over the years in the comics to the point to where they are recognized without their hero counterpart. I think that would be really cool and allow both villains and heroes movies to have their own distinct tone and stand on their own.

  15. #15
    Astonishing Member j9ac9k's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,991

    Default

    I could see a "KRAVEN" movie based thematically and tonally on "Kraven's Last Hunt" without nec adapting that story or even using Spider-Man.("but how" you ask? Because Spider-Man had taken on a significance in his mind beyond Peter Parker or him as a person. Just find a substitute like.... millennials as the bane of his existence and you've got a new "Saw" franchise of him burying kids alive or hunting them to reclaim his old-school honor in a valueless modern world.... okay, not that you have to make it horror like "Saw" but it could still be a serious character study)

    Honestly, Batman:TAS laid the groundwork for almost any of his rogues in terms of boiling them down to their psychological damage and seeing that run amok.

    I could also see a "Luthor" film showing this ruthless ambitious genius work his way to the top of the heap - like "Goodfellas" meets Bill Gates, tell the tale in a way that actually mirrors what we all know about Superman/Clark's development and really set us up for how Superman's appearance impacted the world, totally F'ing up all his plans and his ego before they even met and why Lex would be so fixated on ruining Superman.
    Last edited by j9ac9k; 12-07-2019 at 01:34 PM.

Posting Permissions

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