DC's Shared universe will start with...

Originally posted by Golgo13
Oh, and one more thing, all those movies have different studios. Daredevil was Fox, Ghost Rider was Colombia, and Hulk was Universal. Not to mention Marvel Studios/Disney, so Marvel had to push for multiple studios to pump out their properties, while WB is only ONE studio, which is why they never were in direct competition.

That was the case, but since they founded Marvel Studios and started creating their shared cinematic universe, they have pulled back three characters whose screen rights had been owned by other studios - Hulk, Punisher and most recently Daredevil. Universal might have distributed The Incredible Hulk in 2008, but they were in the same position Fox was with Lucasfilm for all those decades with Star Wars - get paid a distribution fee with no rights. The multiple studio blitz in the early 2000's helped Marvel get a foothold, but now they want more revenue and control. The only two properties I believe they won't reclaim any time soon are the X-Men screen rights from Fox, and Spider Man from Sony, because both are really profitable.

Warner Bros. squandered their advantage for decades with some old thinking. When Superman started to crap out in the 1980's, they finally turned to Batman instead. When Batman hit a wall in the late 1990's they got preoccupied with Harry Potter. By the mid-2000's with Batman Begins, they finally started to see they could do more than one series at a time. Marvel was showing the way.

Originally posted by roughrider
Definitely promising. The Nolan/Snyder creative marriage might work out after all. 👆

The challenge will be to balance out the savior mystique the movies have traded heavily in, with the narrative demands of putting him in a larger universe. We got to see why Thor works with others less powerful than him in Avengers; we need as viewers(plus the casual fans) to buy why Superman needs Batman & others in the JL, what they bring to the table that Clark doesn't.

That's if they want to do this shared universe...

Thor was less powerful in the movies, right? I was under the impression that he didn't really need a Black Widow or Captain America.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Thor was less powerful in the movies, right? I was under the impression that he didn't really need a Black Widow or Captain America.

I know some would say Hulk was, and while he might be the strongest Thor has the most powerful feats of anyone.

Originally posted by Newjak
He was less powerful than his comic book counter part but still the most powerful hero in Marvels shared Universe.

I know some would say Hulk was, and while he might be the strongest Thor has the most powerful feats of anyone.

I think Hulk was stronger, but Thor had overall more power.

Originally posted by Golgo13
I think Hulk was stronger, but Thor had overall more power.

I was happy that Thor was able to compete physically with Hulk at least.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
👆

That is what they needed to focus on. Forming an actual bond between Sinestro and Hal, the first human Green Lantern.

New trailer for Man of Steel:
YouTube video

this looks good

Originally posted by Golgo13
Thor was less powerful in the movies, right? I was under the impression that he didn't really need a Black Widow or Captain America.

I think both Thor and Hulk - both herald level in power, like Superman - I think Marvel Studios dialed them back a tad from their highest comic showings, so to find the best mix of brawn & brains with their other teammates. They landed somewhere between their Ultimate levels and 616 levels. It was part of finding the plausible dynamic, for why they should function as a team. Interestingly, they left lots of room for Iron Man to get more power each time out, with every new suit he constructs.

I'm still happy with how both got portrayed - Hulk was a near unstoppable force of destruction, Thor showed his near invulnerability & ability to casually soak damage, plus his great firepower with the lightning.

I think DC might be trying the same thing, hence the rumours about Superman's power level in this being less, than his previous movies.

And did Amy Adams actually keep her red hair? That's a real departure from the traditionally brunette Lois Lane.

Same trailer. Iconic music. Just watch:

YouTube video

That looks really good, can't wait! 🙂

Originally posted by roughrider
I think both Thor and Hulk - both herald level in power, like Superman - I think Marvel Studios dialed them back a tad from their highest comic showings, so to find the best mix of brawn & brains with their other teammates. They landed somewhere between their Ultimate levels and 616 levels. It was part of finding the plausible dynamic, for why they should function as a team. Interestingly, they left lots of room for Iron Man to get more power each time out, with every new suit he constructs.

I'm still happy with how both got portrayed - Hulk was a near unstoppable force of destruction, Thor showed his near invulnerability & ability to casually soak damage, plus his great firepower with the lightning.

I think DC might be trying the same thing, hence the rumours about Superman's power level in this being less, than his previous movies.

And did Amy Adams actually keep her red hair? That's a real departure from the traditionally brunette Lois Lane.

Yeah, Amy Adams doesn't look like a Lois. I'm sure she'll be great. Oscar nominee and all.

I think Superman will still be stronger and more formidable than Thor.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
Same trailer. Iconic music. Just watch:

YouTube video

As much as I love the score, it doesn't follow the same dramatic arc at all, so it comes off clunky. And it clearly doesn't match what we see on screen thematically either. John Williams' score is the best superhero score of all time in my book but - it has no place in this trailer. Probably not in this version of Superman either, from what I know so far.

Originally posted by Golgo13
GL is the only one that overspent. Like I said before, Superman Returns wasn't a complete failure and made it's money back.

SR also overspent. And while your happy SR made it's money back in the next couple of years completely unknown superoes were tripling their budget cost.

SR DID overspend on it's budget, and it's so called "non-failure" set WB back a few years, got the director fired and lead to a complete reboot.

So not sure how anyone can say that's not a failure.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
SR DID overspend on it's budget, and it's so called "non-failure" set WB back a few years, got the director fired and lead to a complete reboot.

So not sure how anyone can say that's not a failure.

agreed it was a complete failure, IMO.. thats why heres to hoping Man of Steel is s success so WB/DC can move forward

SR was definitely a financial failure - even though it did better than break even (cost something like 250M and made around 370M) that's not nearly good enough to be a good return on their investment. Movies are extremely high risk - which is why they are also very formulaic (the formula intended to draw mainstream crowds in), and more so the more money they cost to make.

So given the risk they took - 250M is a lot of money - the people that invested in SR are looking at it like a failure. I personally liked the movie, but it was a box office failure.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
Same trailer. Iconic music. Just watch:

YouTube video

If the movie is as good as the trailer, this will set the bar.

Superman Returns was a qualified success. But after nearly two decades away from the big screen, studios executives expected the film to be much more dominant at the box office, and not to be so completely outperformed by the 'Pirate who runs like a girl' (aka POTC: Dead Man's Chest) as one critic termed it. It didn't match the huge publicity blitz it got, and seemed to please critics more than the average fan. So after months of public wrangling by Warner execs, the series returned to the back burner for further re-thinking. Christopher Nolan then emerges as the golden boy of Warners with a few box office and critical smashes in a row, they turn to him...and here we are.

I'm still a big fan of the first film and the mythos it spawned, and it was nice Bryan Singer wanted to continue it with SR. They just found out most of the public wasn't as nostalgic, and his extremely deliberate(re: slow) pacing of the film tested patience. I can understand the need for a modern re-invention...just thankful it wasn't that Jon Peters/Tim Burton/Nicolas Cage abomination that nearly happened in the 1990's(Superman Lives.)

SR's mythos was just Donner's tacked on...

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
thats why heres to hoping Man of Steel is s success so WB/DC can move forward

Let's hope so.

It's a shame their 1 titan(TDK) can't be incorporated into a shared Universe. Because it means they are basically starting from scratch.

MOS looks good, but he could have used the backing of a successful Batman franchise to move forward with JL.

It's yet to be confirmed MOS will be the starting point of a shared universe, or that Justice League will even be in the same continuity. Remember their previous JL project involved casting different actors for Superman & Batman, separate from the the individual film series? That went over like a lead balloon with fans, and was a major reason the project got scrapped at the 11th hour.

Christopher Nolan is calling the shots on this; as long as he keeps saying he doesn't see a way for Batman & Superman to share a cinematic universe, well... 😬