Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

So, word's been out for a while that the CW wants to do another DC superhero series in the vein of "Arrow" and of course "Supernatural". "Amazon" apparently will be a live action series focused on Wonder Woman.

Anyway, here's some recent news concerning the show.

Obtained from Deadline.com



Apparently, this is a casting call sort of thing and the network is actively looking for actresses who would fit the bill for the main character...who is named Iris (WTF?).

Now, CW's actually got something decent on their hands with Arrrow, but really, this just once again seems like WB is at a lost as to what to do with Diana/Wonder Woman. I have no earthly idea why they're using the name Iris. I mean is 'Diana' too much of a stretch? Or is this going to be a new Wonder Woman entirely - which would be utterly stupid? It's almost as if WB has no idea what Wonder Woman is about and doesn't want the character to achieve greater mainstream popularity.

I'd think a live action GOOD Wonder Woman series (or film) would be great. And honestly, I have no idea what makes the franchise so seemingly impossible to work with.

So, will this be like Xena?

Well, it's going to be set in the modern day apparently. And they'll have the classic culture shock aspect that Diana Iris has been portrayed with in most incarnations. Doesn't seem to outright mention anything mythical at all or even allude to her being super powered.

Really, if they want to go through with this, just call it something else and don't try to feed it to people as "Wonder Woman" or anything associated with it.

Supposedly the writer of the show will be the guy who wrote WW after Gail Simone did. Or it could have been before.

JMS? He was the one who basically took Superman and Wonder Woman into a nosedive right before the reboot. He can write good tv, though (see: Babylon 5).

I'm convinced Warner doesn't actually like Wonder Woman so they pick ideas that will fail just so they have an excuse not to.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
JMS? He was the one who basically took Superman and Wonder Woman into a nosedive right before the reboot. He can write good tv, though (see: Babylon 5).

No, the gay guy. He writes for TV as well.

WB does TV right, generally, so even though it looks bad on paper, doesn't mean it will be.

Nolan's Batman looks bad on paper, too.

Originally posted by Golgo13
No, the gay guy. He writes for TV as well.

WB does TV right, generally, so even though it looks bad on paper, doesn't mean it will be.

Nolan's Batman looks bad on paper, too.

Most of WB's shows are mediocre at best, barring Supernatural.

Batman, more so than Superman and arguably any other character, thrives on different interpretations and visions of the character, primarily because he's been successful in almost all of them. Wonder Woman hasn't even really had major mainstream success out of Linda Carter. She doesn't have the advantage of being nearly as multi-faceted as Batman is.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Most of WB's shows are mediocre at best, barring Supernatural.

Batman, more so than Superman and arguably any other character, thrives on different interpretations and visions of the character, primarily because he's been successful in almost all of them. Wonder Woman hasn't even really had major mainstream success out of Linda Carter. She doesn't have the advantage of being nearly as multi-faceted as Batman is.

I was just speaking about the super hero ones. JLU, Batman TAS, Smallville, Arrow, Batman Beyond, Superman, and all of the movies they have done, like Under the Red Hood.

I don't watch TV in general, so I wouldn't know or care.

I should have just said cartoons as well. A bunch of favs of mine like Animaniacs, Tiny Toons, Looney Toons, etc...

Jake why do you insist on arguing with Dan?


But seriously, if this doesn't at least have the supernatural aspect I can't even say it's Wonder Woman. Hopefully they just haven't mentioned it yet.

You mean mystical aspect? Or is that one and the same?

When I say supernatural I mean magic and spirits and stuff in general, so yeah. But I guess mystical would be more accurate.

BTW, who is arguing?

The show is still in it's early stages, so anything is possible.

Geoff Johns has recently tweeted that if this show does kick off the ground, they will use the name Diana, citing that "Iris" is a codename used to avoid speculation.

Here's hoping the actual script and concept of the show is fleshed out to be decent.

with the success of Arrow, it really is no surprise.. this show about Diana, yes Diana certainly can be the CW's next breakout hit when it debuts

http://www.deadline.com/2012/11/cw-warner-bros-explore-casting-the-lead-in-wonder-woman-origin-project-meet-iris/

http://www.newsarama.com/tv/warner-bros-searching-for-amazon-lead.html

BTW, I can't help think that WB is already promoting these characters for the JLA movie. It was already stated that since there won't be any solo movies, they will market the characters in other venues. Like video games, TV, comics, etc...

The next Batman game will have the JLA, we have Arrow, and now Wonder Woman.

So, it's Superman, Green Arrow, and WW in the movie so far.

WTF is this shit?

Iris.... Why not just name her Diana? Seriously WB, get your head out of your ass.

From the update and link, she will be called Diana.

Originally posted by Golgo13


So, it's Superman, Green Arrow, and WW in the movie so far.

And obviously Batman.

I'm glad WB are taking the lead on the small screen front at least, and using that to move to something bigger on the big screen. That's smart. At this point it would be silly just copying Marvel's formula.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
And obviously Batman.

I'm glad WB are taking the lead on the small screen front at least, and using that to move to something bigger on the big screen. That's smart. At this point it would be silly just copying Marvel's formula.

Right. I don't get why people think you only need solo movies to lead up to a big ensemble one. Did X-Men do that? Oceans 11? Seven Samurai? I understand JLA is a whole new beast, but all that is required is a coherent story.

If the JLA is successful, this will spin out the solo movies, which should be more successful than if spinning out them first.

X-Men is different. it's at it's heart a team book, whereas with Justice League, it's about a bunch of solo heroes coming together.

Individual movies would be more sensible, tbh. Otherwise when JLA comes along, someone is going to end up unhappy that their hero didn't get enough screen time.

Yes, ensemble cast. It's worked out before without solo movies.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Yes, ensemble cast. It's worked out before without solo movies.

Not when everyone feels like one character could carry their own movie by themselves.

Half, if not all of the JLA, could support their own movie.

You can't say that about X-Men.

It doesn't mean you can't have a consistent story that could work in a film, though. Just because you have solo movies, doesn't guarantee the movie will be good or bad.

Even in the X-Men, you had actrors complaining about not having enough screen time. The movies (First two) were still good.

Some of the Avengers felt the same way, but the movie was still good. Consistency is key.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Not when everyone feels like one character could carry their own movie by themselves.

Half, if not all of the JLA, could support their own movie.

You can't say that about X-Men.

This.

Avengers and JLA are about prominent solo characters coming together to become something larger than the sum of their parts.

Marvel didn't invent the crossover film or shared continuity, so why WB is going out of their way so as to not copy Marvel is silly; by that same logic Marvel wouldn't even have bothered making the Avengers to begin with because it would be "copying" the Justice League.

Going straight into a JLA can work if they have a solid script and cast. They can have a good script but actors that plays their role well enough is another story. With every solo movie, Marvel had time to focus on finding good actors that fit the particular role. The Hulk casting had problems as we all know. But Hemsworth is the perfect Thor. Downey is a perfect Tony Stark. Evan's pulled off Captain America even though I had doubts. Then you got Jackson and Hiddleston who were both fantastic. The aside from building continuity and a shared universe, a lot of the costumes and elements were already there.

Warner Bros is tasked with finding a cast to fit these roles and build these sets and costumes in a short amount of time. If the script is good, the cast could prove to be the weak link of this movie. Right now all they have is Superman and possibly GL cast. And Reynolds doesn't due GL justice.

^^ I finally agree with you on something.

But I totally agree. You just need a good script, DIRECTOR to make it work, and a good cast, which has good chemistry.

By no means am I saying this movie is going to be good, but they already chose a screen writer who has chops and even Mark Millar acknowledged that this will be a "thing of beauty".

One thing I do worry about, though, it the executives or whoever changing the script. From what I hear, the story isn't going to follow the formulaic model of heroes teaming up to save the earth, but something totally different.

Take this with a grain of salt, but here is what Millar said not too long ago:

Originally posted by Golgo13
It doesn't mean you can't have a consistent story that could work in a film, though. Just because you have solo movies, doesn't guarantee the movie will be good or bad.

Even in the X-Men, you had actrors complaining about not having enough screen time. The movies (First two) were still good.

Some of the Avengers felt the same way, but the movie was still good. Consistency is key.

I'm not saying it would necessarily be bad; just that these characters need to be established before sticking them in a movie and expecting it to do as well as avengers, which WB will expect it to, and if it doesn't, it's the fans that pay the price.

Originally posted by Golgo13
^^ I finally agree with you on something.

But I totally agree. You just need a good script, DIRECTOR to make it work, and a good cast, which has good chemistry.

By no means am I saying this movie is going to be good, but they already chose a screen writer who has chops and even Mark Millar acknowledged that this will be a "thing of beauty".

mark millar's a ****ing attention whore, though.

I think with the long established careers the JLA has had, it won't matter. Most people have a sense of who the Flash is, Wonder Woman is the most recognizable female character EVER, there was just a GL movie, and Aquaman is also a house hold name.

Not to mention the cartoons on Cartoon Network and other various media outlooks.

The Avengers was somewhat different. They didn't have as much exposure as the DC characters and weren't as well known.

Millar says he believes Millarworld will be the third company of comics "Big Three", implying he thinks all of his work is more over than the likes of Image and Dark Horse and countless other independent publishers. That and he one day believes that characters such as Kick-Ass and Superior will be as popular as Spider-Man.

Egomaniacal is putting it lightly.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Millar says he believes Millarworld will be the third company of comics "Big Three", implying he thinks all of his work is more over than the likes of Image and Dark Horse and countless other independent publishers. That and he one day believes that characters such as Kick-Ass and Superior will be as popular as Spider-Man.

Egomaniacal is putting it lightly.

Yes, Millar is full of himself, but Millar isn't giving his own opinion on the script, but what he heard from one of his pals or something. Going all dark and real world isn't a surprise, since Nolan established the mood of a super hero movie could be and it looks like Man of Steel will follow suit.

Originally posted by Golgo13
I think with the long established careers the JLA has had, it won't matter. Most people have a sense of who the Flash is, Wonder Woman is the most recognizable female character EVER, there was just a GL movie, and Aquaman is also a house hold name.

Not to mention the cartoons on Cartoon Network and other various media outlooks.

The Avengers was somewhat different. They didn't have as much exposure as the DC characters and weren't as well known.

They're still putting all their eggs in one basket.

What happens after JLA? Do we start getting individual movies?

Originally posted by Golgo13
Yes, Millar is full of himself, but Millar isn't giving his own opinion on the script, but what he heard from one of his pals or something. Going all dark and real world isn't a surprise, since Nolan established the mood of a super hero movie could be and it looks like Man of Steel will follow suit.

It's Superman. It's not like you can ground him in realism.

Besides, a "Nolan" JLA would kinda suck, tbh.

Originally posted by -Pr-
They're still putting all their eggs in one basket.

What happens after JLA? Do we start getting individual movies?



It's Superman. It's not like you can ground him in realism.

Besides, a "Nolan" JLA would kinda suck, tbh.

Yes, that is their plan. Or at least that is the RUMOR. WB is hoping for the JLA to ultra popular, thus once they spin their solo movies after JLA, the solo movies will benefit from it.

As for a Nolan JLA, I think the tone will follow Man of Steel. Let's wait and see how MOS is before we judge it. It's too early to tell.

I know it's the plan, I was more speaking of how dumb I think it is.

Man of Steel doesn't feel like Nolan to me. The tone of that seems fine from what trailers I've seen.

It's risky, nobody is disputing that, but I don't like to jump to conlusions and automatically think it's going to fail.

What has been popping up on the net is that this is being rushed. That is somewhat false. The script has been in the works for well over a year. And the movie isn't coming out until 2015. WB has more than likely planed well ahead, since their 2 blockbusters have come to a close. Harry Potter and Nolan's Batman.

To me, Man of Steel has a whole new feel to it. Something fresh and not in the same vein as the previous films. I think it's going to be way better than the last one and even the Christopher Reeve one.

Originally posted by Golgo13
It's risky, nobody is disputing that, but I don't like to jump to conlusions and automatically think it's going to fail.

What has been popping up on the net is that this is being rushed. That is somewhat false. The script has been in the works for well over a year. And the movie isn't coming out until 2015. WB has more than likely planed well ahead, since their 2 blockbusters have come to a close. Harry Potter and Nolan's Batman.

To me, Man of Steel has a whole new feel to it. Something fresh and not in the same vein as the previous films. I think it's going to be way better than the last one and even the Christopher Reeve one.

It's not jumping to conclusions. WB has a long history of not knowing what the **** they're doing with their properties. This whole JLA thing feels very much like a knee-jerk reaction to Avengers.

We'll see...

Not all of their movies are failures either. They got lucky with nolan, but that doesnt mean they cant duplicate another success. The script has been in the works for awhile, even before the avengers was launched.

I honestly don't think there's any point in doing a Solo movie for everyone first at this point. I mean is one of those movies going to be GL? What if the Flash or WW flop that bad?? People won't like a Batman reboot at this point.

And it would just seem like a second class copy of the Avengers formula. It certainly wouldn't have that feel of something Original like Avengers pulled off.

They just need to build hype for it somehow (on top of having a good Director, Cast and Plot), and TV could be a good medium to get people excited for some of these characters. Whilst in the process they could at least dominate the small screen medium for superheroes.

Yep. Supposedly the movie focuses on the trinity. Batman supes and ww. Well they just had a huge batan trilogy, man of steel comes out next year and ww will have her own tv show. It doeant make sense to have solo moviea now. Not to mentiin that they want to keep a good distance from the gl movie that came out not too long ago.

The batman reboot will come out in 2016, so the movie will set the tone for the solo movies.

Anybody think they will use the CW Arrow and Wonder Woman in the JLA film?

god no.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Not all of their movies are failures either. They got lucky with nolan, but that doesnt mean they cant duplicate another success. The script has been in the works for awhile, even before the avengers was launched.

green lantern and superman returns are two of the biggest offenders. and now their deal with nickelodeon or whatever kids channel it is, is in trouble.

in the works for that long usually means they haven't been able to nail down or decide, probably because twenty executives are all trying to get their way. being in the works that long is a bad thing.

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Anybody think they will use the CW Arrow and Wonder Woman in the JLA film?

Nope. Not a chance.

Originally posted by -Pr-
god no.



green lantern and superman returns are two of the biggest offenders. and now their deal with nickelodeon or whatever kids channel it is, is in trouble.

in the works for that long usually means they haven't been able to nail down or decide, probably because twenty executives are all trying to get their way. being in the works that long is a bad thing.

Superman Returns wasn't a complete failure, because it made it's money back.

What deal with Nickelodeon are you talking about?

This is why they are hoping MOS will lead the way to a JL movie, which sets the tone for future solo movies. Robinov has a plan, he just needs to stick with it.

Yea, Superman Returns grossed more than Captain America and Thor adjusted for inflation, though it did have a higher budget. Heck I think it even grossed more than X-Men: First Class, Ghost Rider: SOV, Wolverine and The Inredible Hulk so I don't get why people say it's a failure.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Superman Returns wasn't a complete failure, because it made it's money back.

What deal with Nickelodeon are you talking about?

This is why they are hoping MOS will lead the way to a JL movie, which sets the tone for future solo movies. Robinov has a plan, he just needs to stick with it.

It made it's money back, but didn't do nearly as well as they'd hoped it would. not to mention it being, well, crap.

How all the shows suddenly went on hiatus until the new year.

WB has had plans before. I'm going to reserve judgement, and i see no reason to be optimistic just yet.

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Yea, Superman Returns grossed more than Captain America and Thor adjusted for inflation, though it did have a higher budget. Heck I think it even grossed more than X-Men: First Class, Ghost Rider: SOV, Wolverine and The Inredible Hulk so I don't get why people say it's a failure.

because it had an obscenely high budget, and was a critical failure.

A lot of movies don't do as good as the executives hope, but at least it made it's money back and thus not a total failure. I'm not being optimistic yet, either, I'm more interested than anything, because WB has put a tight lid on things.

Once I know the cast, look/feel of the movie, and director, than I'll start to judge things and even then, it can still turn out good. There were tons of negatives when people first saw Heath and Hathaway as Catwoman, but it turned out well.

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Yea, Superman Returns grossed more than Captain America and Thor adjusted for inflation, though it did have a higher budget. Heck I think it even grossed more than X-Men: First Class, Ghost Rider: SOV, Wolverine and The Inredible Hulk so I don't get why people say it's a failure.

Some of those like X-Men First Class didn't do as expected in box office either, but it was still awesome. I actually prefer X-Men First Class to Avengers. It was much more memorable.

Ghost Rider and Punisher were also failures, along with the last Blade movies.

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Anybody think they will use the CW Arrow and Wonder Woman in the JLA film?

Doubtful. Usually they see both as a separate medium and often I think they look down on the TV actors. Also it might confuse continuity for fans.

Like I said before, there is a rumor going around that Gina Carano will have a cameo in MOS. They are still casting for WW for the TV show.

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/superman-man-steel-henry-cavill-seen-wonder-woman-gina-carano

Just a rumor, but seeing as Supes and WW are going out in the comics, they might do the same in the movies.

I don't think Superman Returns did make it's money back. I've heard movies have to make considerably more than their production cost to break even because the Cinema's take their share of the ticket price.

And SR's production cost was around $250mill and it did not even make $400mill.

But the real reason SR was a complete failure is because whatever money it made was just from having the name Superman. I mean jeez can you imagine if The Amazing Spiderman made less than $400mill!

Whilst something like Thor did incredibly well because besides tripling it's budget cost it had to fight the fact that not many people knew who Thor even was!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER


Whilst something like Thor did incredibly well because besides tripling it's budget cost it had to fight the fact that not many people knew who Thor even was!

That's why people need to be more open minded to new comic book characters besides relying on the same old ones they all know and love.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I don't think Superman Returns did make it's money back. I've heard movies have to make considerably more than their production cost to break even because the Cinema's take their share of the ticket price.

And SR's production cost was around $250mill and it did not even make $400mill.

But the real reason SR was a complete failure is because whatever money it made was just from having the name Superman. I mean jeez can you imagine if The Amazing Spiderman made less than $400mill!

Whilst something like Thor did incredibly well because besides tripling it's budget cost it had to fight the fact that not many people knew who Thor even was!

http://www.cracked.com/funny-758-superman-returns/

Nice article and on the bottom they address if it actually made any money. If you count WW, it made money. Close to or about 400 M.

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Anybody think they will use the CW Arrow and Wonder Woman in the JLA film?

its possible, but highly unlikely

Originally posted by Golgo13
http://www.cracked.com/funny-758-superman-returns/

Nice article and on the bottom they address if it actually made any money. If you count WW, it made money. Close to or about 400 M.


"So did it make money? Yes, of course it did.


But not that much..."

The underlined part is Key.

For the first Superman movie in decades not to make much money is abysmal. Can you imagine if the new Spiderman movie made only $400mill worldwide?? That would have been a disaster! And that was a reboot after only 5 years!

And btw Iron Man even in "gross earnings" did a heck of a lot better than SR. And Iron Man was pretty much an unknown so had very little hype/excitement to it.

Yep. SR being what it was set DC movies back years. Then GL came along and didn't help either.

I honestly think that without Nolan's Batman, we wouldn't have Man of Steel, or what might come after it.

It's sad how the near future of DC movies rests on Superman's shoulders. Though oddly fitting, in a way.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
"So did it make money? Yes, of course it did.


But not that much..."

The underlined part is Key.

For the first Superman movie in decades not to make much money is abysmal. Can you imagine if the new Spiderman movie made only $400mill worldwide?? That would have been a disaster! And that was a reboot after only 5 years!

And btw Iron Man even in "gross earnings" did a heck of a lot better than SR. And Iron Man was pretty much an unknown so had very little hype/excitement to it.

But you said it didn't make it's money back, all I said is it did. End of story. 250 compared to 400.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Like I said before, there is a rumor going around that Gina Carano will have a cameo in MOS. They are still casting for WW for the TV show.

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/superman-man-steel-henry-cavill-seen-wonder-woman-gina-carano

Just a rumor, but seeing as Supes and WW are going out in the comics, they might do the same in the movies.


most likely that won't happen either, as WB/DC need to establish Siupes first as a single man saving the planet and not shagging somebody.. if they do have a Supes/Diana pairing onscreen, that should most likely be in the sequel to the Justice League film and not before

I thought the Wonder Woman cameo had been quashed a while back?

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Yea, Superman Returns grossed more than Captain America and Thor adjusted for inflation, though it did have a higher budget. Heck I think it even grossed more than X-Men: First Class, Ghost Rider: SOV, Wolverine and The Inredible Hulk so I don't get why people say it's a failure. Because breaking even or making a bit more than what it cost to make the film does not constitute a game being a success.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
most likely that won't happen either, as WB/DC need to establish Siupes first as a single man saving the planet and not shagging somebody.. if they do have a Supes/Diana pairing onscreen, that should most likely be in the sequel to the Justice League film and not before

From what I hear its a cameo, meaning she wont be established. I also hear they shot new scenes just to lead into a jl movie.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Like I said before, there is a rumor going around that Gina Carano will have a cameo in MOS. They are still casting for WW for the TV show. If she can act, this could work real well.

She was okay in Haywire. She could be a convincing Diana.

i thought this rumour was refuted ages ago, though... Maybe it resurfaced.

Who shot it down? I just saw the rumor last week.

Originally posted by -Pr-
She was okay in Haywire. She could be a convincing Diana. Just checked out the Haywire trailer...damn, I can't believe this one got by me.

It doesn't say much for her acting one way or the other. But as I'm watching, I'm pretending this is a WW trailer (uncostumed Diana), and those fight scenes fit to a tee (it's so much better with a real fighter than with a trained actor). I'd like to see her in a cameo, just to give her a shot.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Who shot it down? I just saw the rumor last week.

I heard about it a while back...

Don't think this is the right one, but still: http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/exclusive-no-wonder-woman-man-steel-2013-movie-solely-focused-superman

Originally posted by Mindship
Just checked out the Haywire trailer...damn, I can't believe this one got by me.

It doesn't say much for her acting one way or the other. But as I'm watching, I'm pretending this is a WW trailer (uncostumed Diana), and those fight scenes fit to a tee (it's so much better with a real fighter than with a trained actor). I'd like to see her in a cameo, just to give her a shot.

I'm sure she'd work, though Lois Lane IS in the movie...

Originally posted by -Pr-
I heard about it a while back...

Don't think this is the right one, but still: http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/exclusive-no-wonder-woman-man-steel-2013-movie-solely-focused-superman





i read that not too long ago..


Originally posted by Golgo13
From what I hear its a cameo, meaning she wont be established. I also hear they shot new scenes just to lead into a jl movie.


im not even sure will cameo to set up the justice league film

Then how do you guys see it going down? How will they transition it to a JL movie?

Originally posted by -Pr-
I'm sure she'd work, though Lois Lane IS in the movie... I like Amy Adams, but please, no red hair for Ms. Lane (I'm still not over "Smallville's" unred-headed Lana).

Originally posted by Golgo13
Then how do you guys see it going down? How will they transition it to a JL movie? DC should take their cue from Marvel: intro each character first in their own flick, with each flick hinting of a shared universe. This is in part what made The Avengers so great: it was like a reunion of (generaly) familiar faces. Crossovers are almost always exciting and fun: it's worked great for decades in comics.

Originally posted by Mindship
I like Amy Adams, but please, no red hair for Ms. Lane (I'm still not over "Smallville's" unred-headed Lana).

DC should take their cue from Marvel: intro each character first in their own flick, with each flick hinting of a shared universe. This is in part what made The Avengers so great: it was like a reunion of (generaly) familiar faces. Crossovers are almost always exciting and fun: it's worked great for decades in comics.

It's not happening, so you can get the idea out of your head. They just had a Batman movie, so waiting until 2016 is a good idea. Same with Green Lantern, which didn't do so great.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Then how do you guys see it going down? How will they transition it to a JL movie?

Awkwardly. If they get one of the cast wrong, then they have to recast for a solo movie. It's like a backwards Hulk **** up.

Yeah, if, but we don't even know who the rest of the cast will be, so...

Originally posted by Golgo13
Yeah, if, but we don't even know who the rest of the cast will be, so...

So... What?

So, how do you see them introducing the shared universe? Nobody has answered the question. I'm looking for theories or possibilities here.

Originally posted by Golgo13
So, how do you see them introducing the shared universe? Nobody has answered the question. I'm looking for theories or possibilities here.

they will do it they way they will do it.. so says Master Skywalker


honestly they really should follow the marvel way bit since they aren't, one simple misstep and everything is frakked up and its back to square one

No movie is perfect, even Avengers wasn't perfect and the cast wasn't perfect, either.

So, no, I don't think copying Marvel is the be all end all.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Awkwardly. If they get one of the cast wrong, then they have to recast for a solo movie. It's like a backwards Hulk **** up.

Would it work if they just made a Kingdom Come movie instead of a JLA one? Movie is told similar to how KC was written/narrated. I think that would work. Atleast they would know where to begin and end and any twist they can add to make it vary from the original. With the JLA movie, where would one even start. Another group of heroes team up to fight a bad guy?

Originally posted by Golgo13
So, how do you see them introducing the shared universe? Nobody has answered the question. I'm looking for theories or possibilities here.

Seeing as they won't be doing it with individual movies first, I can't see another option. They could strike gold with JLA, but you have to admit that the odds are against them on this.

Originally posted by Golgo13
No movie is perfect, even Avengers wasn't perfect and the cast wasn't perfect, either.

So, no, I don't think copying Marvel is the be all end all.

Huh? Avengers had a great cast, and pretty much every major role was spot on. What didn't you like?

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
Would it work if they just made a Kingdom Come movie instead of a JLA one? Movie is told similar to how KC was written/narrated. I think that would work. Atleast they would know where to begin and end and any twist they can add to make it vary from the original. With the JLA movie, where would one even start. Another group of heroes team up to fight a bad guy?

that doesn't really set up a franchise, though. That, and to fully appreciate Kingdom Come requires a decent knowledge of DC. At least with a JLA movie you can have it as a semi-origin story.

I've always didn't care for Scarlet in any movie. She's an average actress, IMO. I would have preferred Edward Norton as Bruce Banner, because Mark Ruffolo (Sp?) was just OK. Don't get me wrong, the cast was really good, but not perfect in my eyes.

This is how I see the movie ending:
Darkseid destroys Krypton (whatever) and Superman is knocked back for miles because of the attack. Wonder Woman or Batman swoops in and says, "need any help, sporto?"

Then the movie ends.

Iris lol?

Iris is a casting name, not WW's name in the show.

Originally posted by Golgo13
I've always didn't care for Scarlet in any movie. She's an average actress, IMO. I would have preferred Edward Norton as Bruce Banner, because Mark Ruffolo (Sp?) was just OK. Don't get me wrong, the cast was really good, but not perfect in my eyes.

This is how I see the movie ending:
Darkseid destroys Krypton (whatever) and Superman is knocked back for miles because of the attack. Wonder Woman or Batman swoops in and says, "need any help, sporto?"

Then the movie ends.

I thought Scarlet did a good job. I've never gotten the hype about her, but I think she was more than decent as Widow.

Have to disagree on Ruffalo. I thought he was excellent as Banner.

And that would suck, honestly.

These people have to be able to carry solo movies by themselves. So if the guy playing Flash, or Aquaman, or GL sucks, no movie for them.

I always thought Scarlet J would make a good Sue Richards.

I think she would be a better sue than scarlet. Tbh I dont care for many modern actresses. Jennifer conneley and kate winslet are the only ones I like as actors and find attractive. Jennifef connely in her prime of course.

Jennifer Connelly was a good Betty Rose.

Is she gonna wear pants this time? That would be awesome.

I think getting her costume "just right" is going to be a big part of whether WW "works" or not, and that's a tough nut to crack. It's going to have to be that perfect blend of traditional and innovative, sexy and serious. I have seen some good (imo) candidates online, eg, Pixar's take...

http://cdn.ientry.com/sites/webpronews/article_pics/WonderWomanPixar.jpg

...but I may also be influenced by how they did WW, too, eg, hair up, serious look, big shoulders. Another variation...

http://comicbook.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/wonder-womans-new-costume.jpg

Basically, I want "Warrior" to hit me when I see her, with "I'd hit it" as a follow-up reaction.

Pants seem to scare people, so at least give her roman legionnaire-style skirt, so she doesn't come off as a joke. "I'd hit it" should never have to be a dress code requirement, certainly not for the only notable female JLA member. Give her some dignity, everything else will fall into place from that.

Originally posted by Golgo13
I've always didn't care for Scarlet in any movie. She's an average actress, IMO. I would have preferred Edward Norton as Bruce Banner, because Mark Ruffolo (Sp?) was just OK. Don't get me wrong, the cast was really good, but not perfect in my eyes.

This is how I see the movie ending:
Darkseid destroys Krypton (whatever) and Superman is knocked back for miles because of the attack. Wonder Woman or Batman swoops in and says, "need any help, sporto?"

Then the movie ends.

"sporto"?

^^ Joke.

Anyway, Newsarama #1 TV series to look forward to in 2013 is Amazon.

http://www.newsarama.com/tv/10-to-watch-in-2013-television-1.html

Originally posted by Golgo13
^^ Joke.

Anyway, Newsarama #1 TV series to look forward to in 2013 is Amazon.

http://www.newsarama.com/tv/10-to-watch-in-2013-television-1.html

It says Arrow not Amazon. I didn't even see Amazon on the list.

SHIELD was no.2. Is that coming this year??

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
It says Arrow not Amazon. I didn't even see Amazon on the list.

SHIELD was no.2. Is that coming this year??

Click on the red 1 and you'll see Amazon.

Bold prediction, considering the pilot hasn't even been shot yet, no finished script and no cast.

Originally posted by Golgo13
^^ Joke.

Anyway, Newsarama #1 TV series to look forward to in 2013 is Amazon.

http://www.newsarama.com/tv/10-to-watch-in-2013-television-1.html

its most likely due to the success of Arrow

She's gonna look something like this.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/TVNews/MSNBC%20TV/Maddow/Blog/2010/newwonderwoman.jpg

No classic look.

Which means looking like she did in that pilot that didn't get picked up?

I think if they follow the lead of Arrow, it will be more functional, less fancy.

Actually I would consider the picture I posted as more functional than this.
http://665880566.r.lightningbase-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ww_pilot.jpg

They were right to cancel that series. She looks like she just came out of a costume party or rodeo. The costume looks too plastic.

This, however, is more tamed. It would be essential for her belt and tiara to be metallic it though. They can even take out the tiara and make her less comically looking.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/TVNews/MSNBC%20TV/Maddow/Blog/2010/newwonderwoman.jpg

The pilot was crap too.

is there a site where the pilot in its entirety is available?

Not to buy, that I know of.

not buy, just to see it.. i've seen some clips of it being filmed on youtube..

Originally posted by super pr*xy
not buy, just to see it.. i've seen some clips of it being filmed on youtube..

To stream it, I honestly don't know, as I never use those sites.

To dl? I'm sure you could find one if you looked in all the usual places.

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
Actually I would consider the picture I posted as more functional than this.
http://665880566.r.lightningbase-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ww_pilot.jpg

They were right to cancel that series. She looks like she just came out of a costume party or rodeo. The costume looks too plastic.

This, however, is more tamed. It would be essential for her belt and tiara to be metallic it though. They can even take out the tiara and make her less comically looking.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/TVNews/MSNBC%20TV/Maddow/Blog/2010/newwonderwoman.jpg

The Miami Vice-era jacket has to go as well. Seriously JMS, WTF was that?

Sad, because the jacket is my favorite part of that design. The 80's hair-band leather/spandex pants are crap, and the chest-plate thing looks out of place.

Still think the Lucy Lawless Xena outfit would be the best look for her.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/01/16/possible-new-wonder-woman-has-experience-at-torchwood-as-a-misfit-and-of-being-human/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed& amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BleedingCool+%28Bleeding+
Cool+Comic+News+%26+Rumors%29

Originally posted by -Pr-
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/01/16/possible-new-wonder-woman-has-experience-at-torchwood-as-a-misfit-and-of-being-human/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed& amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BleedingCool+%28Bleeding+
Cool+Comic+News+%26+Rumors%29


interesting choice.. not sure if she fits but will wait and see

Originally posted by -Pr-
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/01/16/possible-new-wonder-woman-has-experience-at-torchwood-as-a-misfit-and-of-being-human/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed& amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BleedingCool+%28Bleeding+
Cool+Comic+News+%26+Rumors%29

Too much of a frail angelic type personally. Get me a hot brunette with a nice ass and rack who can act dammit.

Lucy Lawless worked as Xena cause she had that "butch" attitude that accompanied a warrior.

There is something about the Kingdom Come WW that always worked for me. Just get a younger version and it'll work.

http://i977.photobucket.com/albums/ae259/the_ninjak/3466_a_full_zps898a95f4.jpg

They'll obviously cast someone Hot. Which is all good. But I agree she also has to have that look that she could easily kick your butt.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
They'll obviously cast someone Hot. Which is all good. But I agree she also has to have that look that she could easily kick your butt.


they could also go the way of Arrow and cast an unknown

Ninjak's right.

It really can not be some skinny, size-0 *****. She has to fill out the ****ing outfit.

Found this, thought it wasn't bad, if perhaps too much of a departure from her traditional look:

http://www.tencentticker.com/projectrooftop/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Wonder-Woman-Colin-Alexander-661x1024.png

Project Rooftop does some pretty cool stuff.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Porn does Wonder Woman's costume better than tv networks:

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2013/04/03/committed-porn-wonder-womans-pants/

^Just who is the actress playing Diana in the XXX parody? She fills out the new-look costume quite well.

Originally posted by -Pr-


I like Adrianne Palicki in G I Joe not her fault that the t.v pilot sucked.

Originally posted by roughrider
^Just who is the actress playing Diana in the XXX parody? She fills out the new-look costume quite well.

Kimberley Kane. Not someone I'm familiar with.

Originally posted by bats2jm
I like Adrianne Palicki in G I Joe not her fault that the t.v pilot sucked.

I don't think she's a good wonder woman, but she's a decent actress.

I don't think she's a good wonder woman, but she's a decent actress.

Anyone specific you would like to in the role because WW is a hard sell and to be honest after seeing the pilot I fell that no one at wb have a clue how to do a modern real world WW. the Amazon idea is great though.

Ugh.

I have no idea why these writers can't come up with a good Wonder Woman story to either pitch as a series or as a film. It's not hard. It really isn't.

Originally posted by bats2jm
Anyone specific you would like to in the role because WW is a hard sell and to be honest after seeing the pilot I fell that no one at wb have a clue how to do a modern real world WW. the Amazon idea is great though.

I dunno, tbh.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Ugh.

I have no idea why these writers can't come up with a good Wonder Woman story to either pitch as a series or as a film. It's not hard. It really isn't.

True. Even the animated movie was pretty darn good.

Originally posted by Mindship
Found this, thought it wasn't bad, if perhaps too much of a departure from her traditional look:


Project Rooftop does some pretty cool stuff.

It's a cool outfit, but a bit harsh.



I think a lot of stuff ignores her diplomat side and overemphasizes the warrior aspect. Which, while part of her character, is not the whole thing.

Originally posted by Q99
It's a cool outfit, but a bit harsh.I don't think I'd use the word 'harsh'. My impression is, if you're going to change things to this extent, just make up a whole new female superhero. Kind of like the American Godzilla film: they changed so much, just make it a whole new monster, instead of cashing in on a name and roar.

Originally posted by Q99
I think a lot of stuff ignores her diplomat side and overemphasizes the warrior aspect. Which, while part of her character, is not the whole thing. Interesting point. Certainly it's an aspect I didn't much consider.

Didn't this show get pushed back?

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Didn't this show get pushed back?

it did.. i think it will be on CW's schedule om 2014-2015. that will give them plenty of time to polish the script and find a good lead actress

You know, as long as Wonder Woman will appear on the small screen, there's no chance of a Justice League movie; they wouldn't make it without her (would they?) So for the length of time it takes to get this thing in production, and however long it runs, there will be no JL movie.

Originally posted by roughrider
You know, as long as Wonder Woman will appear on the small screen, there's no chance of a Justice League movie; they wouldn't make it without her (would they?) So for the length of time it takes to get this thing in production, and however long it runs, there will be no JL movie.

Why can't they have both WW on the small screen and big screen?

Originally posted by Golgo13
Why can't they have both WW on the small screen and big screen?

Because it's wrong. I felt that way when they did the first X-Files movie; it was a con to get us to watch it while the series was still running. At least when they did the Star Trek films, there wasn't any series running that had the principal cast. Only way it works is if there's an animated series of Wonder Woman; there would be no confusion of perception among the casual audience. Animated series can run concurrent with a live action film series. Another live action series on TV? - No.

Marvel Studios & Disney may be prepping a live action SHIELD series that ties into continuity, but they will be off in another direction, filling in the background details. When there's an Avengers movie, they will just continue in a support role.

Originally posted by roughrider
Because it's wrong. I felt that way when they did the first X-Files movie; it was a con to get us to watch it while the series was still running. At least when they did the Star Trek films, there wasn't any series running that had the principal cast. Only way it works is if there's an animated series of Wonder Woman; there would be no confusion of perception among the casual audience. Animated series can run concurrent with a live action film series. Another live action series on TV? - No.

Marvel Studios & Disney may be prepping a live action SHIELD series that ties into continuity, but they will be off in another direction, filling in the background details. When there's an Avengers movie, they will just continue in a support role.

There is no rule for it, though. They could very well be prepping for a JLA movie and a live action WW TV show as well. A JLA movie will happen, IMO. It's likely delayed, but there will be one eventually.

Didn't Returns come out when Smallville was on TV?

Originally posted by -Pr-
Didn't Returns come out when Smallville was on TV?

I think so, but Clark in Smallville wasn't wearing a costume with an S on it.

Originally posted by Golgo13
I think so, but Clark in Smallville wasn't wearing a costume with an S on it.

I suppose...

Originally posted by Golgo13
There is no rule for it, though. They could very well be prepping for a JLA movie and a live action WW TV show as well. A JLA movie will happen, IMO. It's likely delayed, but there will be one eventually.

There's no rule written down, per se. But it's an understanding. Hollywood executives want you to come to the cinemas to watch what you can't see for free on TV. Hence why there won't be a live action Wonder Woman on TV and in the movies at the same time. They bent the rule somewhat with Smallville/Superman Returns, but it was a very different continuity with Clark not being Superman, there.

There are few examples of double dipping. Why I felt the X-Files movie was a cheat was because they wouldn't reveal or settle anything permanently, while the series was still ongoing. They did double dip during the animated days of Transformers in 1980's, but at least that movie signaled the beginning of a big new direction for the TV series that followed.

Unless of course they decide that the tv show is in the movie's continuity, and use the same Wonder Woman in a jla movie.

Well, until we know more about the WW TV show, this could very well be the same as Smallville where it's entirely different from the movies. Waaay to early to tell.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Unless of course they decide that the tv show is in the movie's continuity, and use the same Wonder Woman in a jla movie.

Let's see if Christopher Nolan has a producing credit anywhere on Amazon. Then the cat will be out of the bag.

I've lost hope for any kind of a shared universe.

If Dark Universe gets going, I will be extremely happy. Del Toro would be perfect.

Keep dreaming. It's all hopes and dreams from here on out....

He's already gone on record that it's full steam ahead. And confirmed it again last week at the comic con. Nothing is guaranteed, but he seems pretty serious about it.

Originally posted by Golgo13
He's already gone on record that it's full steam ahead. And confirmed it again last week at the comic con. Nothing is guaranteed, but he seems pretty serious about it.

He was all full steam ahead on his adaptation of At The Mountains Of Madness too, with Tom Cruise as his star and James Cameron producing. And Universal still plugged the plug at the 11th hour. It's true, about nothing is guaranteed - until they are finally out there, cameras rolling.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Unless of course they decide that the tv show is in the movie's continuity, and use the same Wonder Woman in a jla movie.

I see roughrider's point, but yeah the could go this way too. Anybody remember how Power Rangers The Movie was outside the tv series continuity? Then came Power Ranger's Turbo The Movie and I guess they decided to make than part of continuity which lead into the new Turbo series. So yeah, it could go either way.

Wait. The Power Rangers movie wasn't canon? Really?

Guess what - the series has problems, and they are going to start all over.

http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/05/16/Wonder-Woman-prequel-Amazon-being-redeveloped/6641368737120/

Man they missed out not doing the movie with Joss Whedon.

Lol.

I am amazed that they really think that Wonder Woman is the most difficult property to adapt.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Man they missed out not doing the movie with Joss Whedon.

A lot of people thought his script for WW was horrible.

I doubt it was though. Were these the same people at WB who thought the script they had for Green Lantern was going to be a huge hit?

I mean lets face it. Not only is Joss the man to do superhero movies but he can do female leads really well too. And he knows his comic books.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I doubt it was though. Were these the same people at WB who thought the script they had for Green Lantern was going to be a huge hit?

I mean lets face it. Not only is Joss the man to do superhero movies but he can do female leads really well too. And he knows his comic books.


Mostly WW fans.