Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

DCTV - General Discussion: Silver Screen VS Small Screen

Now, I don't claim to be an expert of any sort on video based media. I'm not sure how many of us here are even in the feild and could bring that side of things into the conversation.

BUT, it seems to me that Marvel is doing things right. Or, at least, following the right formula. Epic movies that are (for the most part) blockbusters time and time again. They put out a TV series following their properties and it just so happens to tie into the movies. Regardless of your position on it's quality, good idea. Even if it DIDN'T tie into the movies, having the presence in both mediums of movie and TV sounds great.

DC, however, seems to be following the wrong format. Their TV shows (well, show singular with Arrow. But, speaking as someone who has seen the Flash pilot, I'm going with shows plural.) are incredible. I look forward to them with fervor.

Their movies however...look, I liked 'Man of Steel' well enough. But I judge a movie, end all be all, on whether or not I'll ACTIVELY seek to watch it again. Nolan's Batman Trilogy? The original Reeve Superman movie? Those I seek out to watch multiple times. And this is actively sitting down to watch it again. Green Lantern is a background movie, sometimes barely that. MOS falls somewhere in between for me.

'Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice' on it's face sounds like an epic movie, but ever since the announcement, every bit of news since just makes me cringe. For the sake of my well founded love of DC and it's characters, I hope against hopes that it's an epic movie that just surprises the hell out of us. But, forgive the wrong universe reference, my spidey sense is tingling with this movie and refuses to stop sounding the warning bells.

But DC is charging ahead with both movies AND TV shows. And based on all of the footage I've seen of the TV shows, DC seems to have it DOWN.

For the record, here are the shows:

Confirmed:
Arrow
The Flash
Gotham
Constantine
iZombie

Rumored:
Preacher
Hourman
Supergirl
Teen Titans

(SIDE NOTE: Has anyone heard anything new about Preacher or Hourman? Be it they were shot down or still in development or anything?)

Now, unlike BVS:DoJ, DC TV stuff has yet to stifle my excitement. Sure, Arrow borrows too heavily from the Batman side of things, but I don't care. I just love every bit of it. And I know I'm not the only one. So in addition to opening up the discussion about DC's approach to TV VS their approach to movies, I'd also like to offer a specific question.

WHY?

Why is it SO HARD to get a good, epic DC movie that blows people out of the water across the board (Marvel Style) when they prove they can kill it with TV?

Is it too many fingers in the pot with movies? Too much money at stake so everyone has to have a say? Like I said, I don't pretend to know how it works...but I just figured I'd ask.

Comments

  • Nevermind on iZombie. I guess it's actually happening. Updating the above post to reflect that...

    http://www.hallels.com/articles/5776/20140911/izombie-rumors-plot-latest-news-walking-dead.htm
  • Found some news on Preacher while I'm at it. Though I'm leaving it in the rumor stage since we haven't gotten to the casting stage yet...

    http://wegotthiscovered.com/tv/work-on-amc-preacher-has-begun/
  • That's a very epic response.

    Do you think though that it AT ALL has to do with Warner having too many people involved? The only reason I hesitate to think of it as a valid theory is that, aren't the people behind the TV shows the same people behind the movies in terms of who profits?

    It seems to me that, what saved Marvels properties was the creation of Marvel Studios. DC Entertainment is different from Marvel Studios though, definitely not the same thing. I wonder if Warner could stand to benefit if they just backed off?
  • Found some news on Preacher while I'm at it. Though I'm leaving it in the rumor stage since we haven't gotten to the casting stage yet...

    http://wegotthiscovered.com/tv/work-on-amc-preacher-has-begun/

    It's also no longer a DC property. Vertigo stuff reverts to the creators after a certain amount of time. Like Y:the last man goes back to BKV and Pia Guerra next year I think.
  • That's a very epic response.

    Do you think though that it AT ALL has to do with Warner having too many people involved? The only reason I hesitate to think of it as a valid theory is that, aren't the people behind the TV shows the same people behind the movies in terms of who profits?

    TV and film are very different arms of a very large octopus. Yes the head benefits, but the head is a group of investors who might never see a movie or watch tv, because they are so busy counting the zeroes in their bank accounts. But if a TV show is successful (relative in the case of Arrow, which would have been canceled in 6 episodes on any other network) it means absolutely nil to the producer or studio head whose job lives or dies with the success or failure of that movie.

    And movie people look down on TV. Less now than in the past, but that attitude of superiority still exists.
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    edited September 2014
    What @EarthGBilly said.

    PLUS.

    A tendency to waste money on special effects and big names (Mar-Lon Brando? Rus-El Crowe? Big wastes both.) and scrimp on scripts.

    A good script can make a cheap movie shine. All the stars and SFX in the world can't wipe the stink off a bad script.
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    And yes, I think the Big Names are related to the embarrassment factor.

    "See? We have SERIOUS ACTORS! This isn't just some comic book movie, it's a SERIOUS FILM!"
  • I don't think it's so much embarrassment as it is simply a lack of confidence in the source material. Kind of the same thing, I suppose, but while the former is a more emotional response, the latter is more about what they think will sell the most tickets. Of course, they’ve recently changed the source material to look more like what they think will sell more tickets at the box office.

    Are they really scrimping on scripts? I'm sure they’re paying good money to get the scripts they're getting. The problem is the type of script they’re looking for.

    As for Big Names, they get them for the same reason any film gets them, to draw attention and publicity to the film. I do agree that they often waste Big Names in roles that don’t call for them, but these are far from the only films guilty of that.
  • I don't think it's so much embarrassment as it is simply a lack of confidence in the source material. Kind of the same thing, I suppose, but while the former is a more emotional response, the latter is more about what they think will sell the most tickets. Of course, they’ve recently changed the source material to look more like what they think will sell more tickets at the box office.

    Are they really scrimping on scripts? I'm sure they’re paying good money to get the scripts they're getting. The problem is the type of script they’re looking for.

    As for Big Names, they get them for the same reason any film gets them, to draw attention and publicity to the film. I do agree that they often waste Big Names in roles that don’t call for them, but these are far from the only films guilty of that.

    Glenn Close anyone?
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    Sometimes I think the BIG NAMES just want to be in a comic book movie, or at least their agent wants them to be, so it isn't always the studio, but I can appreciate the mindset that thinks it would help with publicity to hire respected name actors.
  • Sometimes I think the BIG NAMES just want to be in a comic book movie, or at least their agent wants them to be, so it isn't always the studio, but I can appreciate the mindset that thinks it would help with publicity to hire respected name actors.

    I think that’s true, though I tend to believe that, for the majority of them, it's more about wanting to be in a box office hit than anything else—and if you can score a recurring role, that’s guaranteed work, so that’s a big bonus too.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    Of course! Though these days many probably equate a Marvel super-hero film to be a box office hit, understandably so.
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    More on that Teen Titans series. Looks like has landed at TNT and a pilot is being produced that begins with Dick Grayson taking on a solo mission: recruiting younger crimefighters to form a new generation of superheroes – and friends. The show is moving toward a pilot order from the network and DC seemingly has no problem with mentioning Batman in the show. Here's the description:
    Based on characters from DC Comics, Titans revolves around a group of young superheroes-to-be who are recruited from every corner of the DC universe. The action-themed drama centers on Dick Grayson, who emerges from the shadow of Batman to become Nightwing, the leader of a fearless band of new superheroes including Starfire, Raven and more. The show is described as a dramatic adventure series that will explore and celebrate one of the most popular comic book titles ever.
    More here.

    So that's Constantine, Arrow, Flash, Gotham, iZombie, Supergirl, and Teen Titans - possibly even Hourman and if one of the characters on Gotham gets killed, will we get a Spectre show? DC is exploding on the small screen and Marvel is dominating the big screen. This is truly a new "Golden Age" for comic fans.
  • nweathingtonnweathington Posts: 6,748

    So that's Constantine, Arrow, Flash, Gotham, iZombie, Supergirl, and Teen Titans - possibly even Hourman and if one of the characters on Gotham gets killed, will we get a Spectre show?

    They'll try to spin The Spectre out of Constantine.
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314

    So that's Constantine, Arrow, Flash, Gotham, iZombie, Supergirl, and Teen Titans - possibly even Hourman and if one of the characters on Gotham gets killed, will we get a Spectre show?

    They'll try to spin The Spectre out of Constantine.
    That will take a really big Salad Shooter™

  • RickMRickM Posts: 407
    Why is it SO HARD to get a good, epic DC movie that blows people out of the water across the board (Marvel Style) when they prove they can kill it with TV?



    DC did blow people out of the water with Batman Begins and Dark Knight. And the third Nolan installment seemed to be wildly successful as well, even though I found it an odd, messy film. While DC doesn't seem to have the same cohesive vision as Marvel, they have very much proven that they can make a superb superhero movie. Just maybe not as often as Marvel does.
  • random73random73 Posts: 2,318
    I think Warner Bros is afraid to go all-in. Any old skaters around? If you want to skate a half pipe you HAVE to put all your weight on the front foot or the board is going to kick out from underneath you and you're going to bust your ass. New skaters (i did this over and over and over) are afraid of falling so they try to pull back a little and they fall again and again and again. Warner Brothers can't succeed until they commit to that front leg and ride through it.
  • random73random73 Posts: 2,318
    also on an related note. we used to say that DC could knock it out of the park with the animated properties but couldn't do a live action show right to save their souls. maybe this is all part of the process thye get the animation down, and they learn a little bit. They start to get the TV stuff down and they learn a little bit. maybe in another 5-10 years they'll have the movies down.
Sign In or Register to comment.