WB’S SECRET PLOT TO DEVELOP JUSTICE LEAGUE REVEALED!

"WB threw that shit before The Avengers walked into the room!"

Well, I was going to pop in here and carry on about how moronic it would be for them NOT to use Cavill and how I think they will change their minds if Man of Steel does well and yadda yadda yadda....

And then I saw Art Decade's post.  Now all I can do is laugh and possibly watch Black Dynamite again.

Starro the Conqueror of course.  But in the film he won't be a giant starfish, he'll be neutron bomb based upon Green Lantern's power.

It wont.  Despite you alluding to the fact that there are two different and legitimate ways to go about building these film universes after seeing the Marvel way I think a team film that will most definitely be chock full of origin stories will suffer tremendously. 

Half the JLA has never been introduced cinematically and at least one will be played by a different actor and probably not crib his costume.  One might have his stand alone film actor playing him but while this character is obviously the leader of the group he is the weakest thematically and storywise apparently because of his supposedly boring, Boy Scout nature.  And the final team member has a film that was so horribly bad that one can only imagine that WB will use a yellow powered Sinestro as the villain as some sort of ill fated callback and ultimately ruin the entire team film from the get-go.

*EDIT*

From the Variety source article

Holy schnikes!  I don't know about anyone else but I am a huge fan of the original Logan's Run movie(and not just because of Jenny Agutter) so my ticket was bought as soon as a remake was announced.  I would prefer Jackman in the role and Gosling kinda tempered my excitement but Refn behind the lens on it?  Ticket now sold again with an early purchase if at all possible.

I've said it before but JLA has so many natural advantages over Avengers it isn't even funny. Doing a completely standalone movie would squander a lot of that. Avengers was allowed to give just a thumbnail intro for each character in the hopes that the previous films had raised enough awareness (either through the movies themselves or their marketing). JLA would need a lot more character introduction which leaves a lot less room for character interplay.

I'm actually fine with the different actors bit. I do wonder if people will be willing to accept a new, probably very different, Batman so soon after Bale's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI 

 

 

I do wonder if people will be willing to accept a new, probably very different, Batman so soon after Bale's.

I would like to see them go Arkham Asylum on the costume and emphasize the World's Greatest Detective angle keeping Bats mysterious and having him provide clues and exposition from the shadows and then bring him more front and center in a second film if it happened to help ease the transition from the Nolan films.

The should say "fuck this" and go with Darkseid for a villain. Confuse the hell out of everyone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelios 

The should say "fuck this" and go with Darkseid for a villain. Confuse the hell out of everyone.

Haha, I almost see Thanos scene as Marvel seeing how awesome The Avengers was and knowing WB would soon follow up with the JLA and preemptively drinking their Darkseid milkshake.

If WB isn't going the Marvel route and building up to a JLA movie, I'd kinda rather they start with the JLA already formed and just dive into a world populated by superheros and supervillians. Maybe follow a new member. And do the big JLA that's constantly at work and stationed in space. Imagine the helicarrier scenes from the Avengers, but instead of having guys in blue jumpsuits running around it was the Firestorm and Star Girl.

I think people are overstating the need to introduce the JLA characters. Everyone knows Superman and Batman's origins, and everyone knows Wonder Woman enough that they don't need to do much. I doubt that they'll have more than two or three other characters, probably Flash (who they can introduce adequately during a brief powers sequence), a Green Lantern (probably Jon Stewart), and maybe Aquaman or Martian Manhunter (though I kind of doubt it).

I look at this as possibly saving us from another goddamn Batman origin movie. It also may allow them to see who audiences seem to respond to and use that to gauge solo movie potential, like how the Hulk's chances for another movie skyrocketed after Avengers. I don't think they have the same need to introduce characters ahead of time as Avengers did, in part because of Superfriends, Justice League animated, the Flash tv show, and the general iconicness of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI 

I've said it before but JLA has so many natural advantages over Avengers it isn't even funny.

Care to elaborate for the non-comic fans in the audience? I'm genuinely interested in how you see JLA being a stronger or better candidate for film than AVENGERS. My only knowledge or reference is the old Saturday morning cartoon, of which the less said, the better.

I've never been enthused for a JLA film, but am simply glad WB didn't do the stupid, confusing thing of having two cinematic Batmans going at the same time. IIRC, there was one element of the Miller story I liked (and I think this was taken from the comics, but I can't be sure). Batman, being his usual detective-y and paranoid self, essentially spied on all the other JLA members, ferreting out their weaknesses and such. I always felt that was really in line with the character, and a great plot aspect to include.

In the comic book world JLA is just ridiculously stacked. The big 5 are unmatched. And the Martian Manhunter (if included) is fucking broken. But movie wise it's going to be a problem. You think Hulk being used correctly in the Avengers was tough? Imagine him being also smart, super fast, able to fly and shooting fucking lasers out of his eyes. Now try to come up with an excuse why he can't do everything and have everyone else around for housekeeping.

Not having Cavill would be a mistake, as it's always years between solidifying what a Superman movie and character should be. Having two at the same time is a mistake.

Not bringing back Ryan Reynolds is fine, as I prefer John Stewart to Hal Jordan anyway and there could be a throw-away line about how Stewart is the new guy. Plus, much like the JLA animated series, there needs to be more diversity. Less white people, less sausage fest. 

Another inherent problem with the JLA is the similarity in character. Batman stands out not just because he's human, but he's a fundamentally different concept than the others who are all fast, strong, and can fly. The Avengers was great because it not only had a range of personalities but powers as well, changing up the dynamic of any given action scene. 

Whedon as writer-director is why Marvel finally got The Hulk right. Who else could WB get that has that kind of comic book DNA and skillset? Bryan Singer's in the doghouse. I can't think of anyone else off the top of my head.

Originally Posted by MikeI 

I've said it before but JLA has so many natural advantages over Avengers it isn't even funny.

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

Care to elaborate for the non-comic fans in the audience?

 

Yeah I'm kinda lost on that one as well.

 

Originally Posted by stelios 

You think Hulk being used correctly in the Avengers was tough? Imagine him being also smart, super fast, able to fly and shooting fucking lasers out of his eyes. Now try to come up with an excuse why he can't do everything and have everyone else around for housekeeping.

  I think the only viable excuse has been that he can't be everywhere at the same time (unless he stops time, of course).

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelios 

You think Hulk being used correctly in the Avengers was tough? Imagine him being also smart, super fast, able to fly and shooting fucking lasers out of his eyes. Now try to come up with an excuse why he can't do everything and have everyone else around for housekeeping.

As mentioned above, Superman's inability to be in more than one place at once is a weakness. Another area to explore, although it's hardly unique to Supes (or any comic-based hero), would be for the villain(s) to exploit his code of ethics.

Was Superman always ridiculously powered? I mean, I know he was always much stronger than a normal human, could fly, yadda yadda, but it seems like one way of infusing the character with a worthwhile dramatic arc is not making him so ridiculously strong and impervious. I think this can be done without making him not-Superman, but I'm not sure how well it would go with Joe and Jane Six-pack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 

As mentioned above, Superman's inability to be in more than one place at once is a weakness. Another area to explore, although it's hardly unique to Supes (or any comic-based hero), would be for the villain(s) to exploit his code of ethics.

 

Was Superman always ridiculously powered? I mean, I know he was always much stronger than a normal human, could fly, yadda yadda, but it seems like one way of infusing the character with a worthwhile dramatic arc is not making him so ridiculously strong and impervious. I think this can be done without making him not-Superman, but I'm not sure how well it would go with Joe and Jane Six-pack.

I don't think he could originally fly which is where "Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound" came from.  He originally was more Hulk like in his leaping long distances for travel I believe.

Supes' Powers

     Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

Was Superman always ridiculously powered? I mean, I know he was always much stronger than a normal human, could fly, yadda yadda, but it seems like one way of infusing the character with a worthwhile dramatic arc is not making him so ridiculously strong and impervious. I think this can be done without making him not-Superman, but I'm not sure how well it would go with Joe and Jane Six-pack.

His original incarnation was not imbued with god-like powers compared to the modern version. For a good primer on early Superman, take a look at the classic Max Fleischer cartoon shorts. He is definitely super-powered but can still be knocked on his ass by giant robots, artillery rounds, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Grimm 

I think people are overstating the need to introduce the JLA characters. Everyone knows Superman and Batman's origins, and everyone knows Wonder Woman enough that they don't need to do much. I doubt that they'll have more than two or three other characters, probably Flash (who they can introduce adequately during a brief powers sequence), a Green Lantern (probably Jon Stewart), and maybe Aquaman or Martian Manhunter (though I kind of doubt it).

 

I look at this as possibly saving us from another goddamn Batman origin movie. It also may allow them to see who audiences seem to respond to and use that to gauge solo movie potential, like how the Hulk's chances for another movie skyrocketed after Avengers. I don't think they have the same need to introduce characters ahead of time as Avengers did, in part because of Superfriends, Justice League animated, the Flash tv show, and the general iconicness of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.
 

Agreed with this. A lot of people forget that one of the reasons DC has not been able to crack these solo movies is because their heroes have TERRIBLE origins. But not every onscreen hero needs an origin. The Magnificent Seven didn't happen after seven other films acted as precursors. We totally get everyone in The Dirty Dozen. If they need a modern corollary, they should think of a Justice League movie like a heist movie.

Also, yeah, Jon Stewart GL. That should be obvious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satorical 

Whedon as writer-director is why Marvel finally got The Hulk right. Who else could WB get that has that kind of comic book DNA and skillset? Bryan Singer's in the doghouse. I can't think of anyone else off the top of my head.

Gil Kenan? He would be far cheaper than even Marvel's choices. He was set to run point on Green Lantern, but his pretty decent script was re-written by Greg "I Am Clearly Blackmailing DC" Berlanti.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

A lot of people forget that one of the reasons DC has not been able to crack these solo movies is because their heroes have TERRIBLE origins.

Wha?!  In what way are the origins for DC heroes any worse than anything from Marvel?  Outside of being a Marvel person over a DC person with an obvious bias that is.

WB certainly has no fucking clue how to translate any of those origins onto the screen in the way that Marvel has I will grant you that but there are still compelling back stories to these characters.

Green Lantern sorta proves my case.

There was a way for that to work onscreen. That wasn't it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

Green Lantern sorta proves my case.

 

There was a way for that to work onscreen. That wasn't it.

The fact that it was an origin story was the absolute least of the film's problems.

Personally I'll love a Kingdom Come film, but no point in having a film with the Justice League and making them all old.

My 2 cents.....

Reguardless of who has the better origin tales, the fact remains we have seen them all a million times how, and those we haven't seen aren't important.  Wolverine, one of the most popular comic book character of all time never even had an origin until relatively recently, and I will argue, he is a hell of a lot more interesting without it.  It has gotten to the point where it just seems the studios think we'll forget that Parker's and Wayne's parents are dead if they don't remind us every 30 minutes.  

I really don't think many movie goers care that much about where these characters come from as long as they do cool interesting or exciting things on screen.  Just anecdotable, but I have spoken to several people who loved the Avengers even though they hadn't seen any of the lead up movies.  I would love for DC to have the balls to just throw us directly into a story of an alreayd established Justice League facing a threat and kicking ass.  Who is going to be confused when a guy in a blue suit, red cape flies onto the screen with that Iconic superman theme playing?  Who is going to ask, "wait, who is that guy?"

Also, the darker skinned members of my social circles all wondered why the hell they made the green lantern white?  None of them had ever heard of Hal Jordan, but they all knew who John Stewart was.

DC does themselves a big disservice by not recognising how many people have seen the Justice League animated show, and how much that has established and Iconic basis for these characters in people's minds.

Lastly, yes put the martian in.  Take a chance DC.  Quit being so safe all the time.  People will accept Jonn Jonzz if he's used correctly.  What does he do that superman can't? Shapeshifting!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackson 

Lastly, yes put the martian in.  Take a chance DC.  Quit being so safe all the time.  People will accept Jonn Jonzz if he's used correctly.  What does he do that superman can't? Shapeshifting!

Plus telepathy and phasing.

The actual question should be, "What does Superman do that Martian Manhunter can't?" The answer is nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

 

Wha?!  In what way are the origins for DC heroes any worse than anything from Marvel?  Outside of being a Marvel person over a DC person with an obvious bias that is.

 

WB certainly has no fucking clue how to translate any of those origins onto the screen in the way that Marvel has I will grant you that but there are still compelling back stories to these characters.

I'm not hugely familiar with all of the DC stable, but I would say that Batman has a good origin.  Wonder Woman's is basically a sillier, slightly pervy version of Thor's (himself the goofiest and imo worst of Marvel's top tier heroes).  Superman was born with every power in the world.  Green Lantern was handed his powers because he was already so heroic?  I don't know what the Flash's story was before he sped up.

Marvel tends to inject some dramatic irony into (and hence, drama) into their heroes' pre-superpower identity.  Their version of Superman started out as the weakest kid on the playground.  Spiderman is a geek who would like to use his powers to just be cool, except that the first time he did that it got a loved one killed.  Tony Stark's brush with death caused a literal change of heart, and he spends half his time using his creation to reign in his other creations.  Daredevil's powers came at the cost of his sight.  Bruce Banner is a super-genius, but becomes a mindless, monosyllabic brute when provoked.

Also, I'm a Marvel person over a DC person.

We always second guess the "general public" (or outright show our contempt for them), but c'mon, we, they, US have always accepted cast changes in our movies.  There's been thirty-seven James Bonds.  Batman, in the 90's alone, was played by three different actors, and each movie was successful.  From a financial point, anyway.  While not the main character, Katie Cruise was replaced by Jane Gyllenhall and no one batted an eye. 

As somebody else already pointed out, give us an interesting trailer, shit blowing up, an iconic shot of the team standing together- yeah, they're going to have to just go for it and crib some of The Avenger's playbook- and we'll be sold.  They're will be initial cynicism from some corners about the project and WB's hoping to get some of those Avenger dollars, but we'll all have our asses in the seats if they give us a DC team up movie.  We always forget one of the most important factors in this kind of thing- kids.  Kids will flock to this shit, and the inclusion of Wonder Woman will probably help get the lil girls in there as well.   It's a no brainer.

Also, cover the formation of the team in a witty prologue.  Fuck the origin orgy that would ensue if you try to intro the whole team in one movie.

I think the Batman thing is such a non issue, really.  WB is going to be able to have their cake and eat it, too. 

And I do say these things as one of the common folk- I never cared much for DC, when I bought comics, it was usually Marvel titles. 

I tend to agree that the origins aren't important. DC's characters aren't BAD, they're just perfunctory, precisely because origins were never the point of superhero comics until quite recently. But two of the heavy hitters--Spider-Man and Batman--happen to have very good origins (and Superman's is pretty great, too, even if we're all sick of it) so people started to think the origins are the key to the story. I remember some Hollywood screenwriter mentioning in an interview that the only interesting part of Superman was what happens leading up to him putting on the costume, and that that's the end of his story. Which, no. Just no.

The problem is, as I've said elsewhere, Marvel's characters lend themselves more to the kind of stories Hollywood likes to tell--they're more Joseph Campbell-y, they've got more of a "hero overcomes his flaws" pattern to them, and, yes, they're often inherently "cooler" in an adolescent way (though Marvel has its share of squares, like Cap and the FF). But you can do good stories with the DC characters--GREAT ones, actually--if you're able to think outside the box. Frankly I think the DC heroes can be more challenging and more about ideas than Marvel's (again, I'm oversimplifying. The most challenging and idea-centric superhero movies to date are still Singer's X-Men films.) Among other things, I think Wonder Woman is a potentially fascinating character who has almost never been handled right. I don't think she's inherently more goofy than most other superheroes, and in fact, I think that her origins being in mythology make her more resonant than many. But hey, I like Thor, too. I like the crazy collision between EVERYTHING--myth, space aliens, mad science, secret government organizations--that you get in a good superhero universe story, and I'm delighted Avengers kept to that rather than going the Mark Millar route and trying to streamline everything into pseudo-realism.

Justice League could have that too. It's just that the filmmakers would have to step out of their comfort zone and NOT make a movie about regular people with weird quirks struggling to overcome their flaws, but rather a movie about greatness, about people who are larger than life. Which is something you rarely see outside the biographical genre. But there's no reason it couldn't be done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 

Care to elaborate for the non-comic fans in the audience? I'm genuinely interested in how you see JLA being a stronger or better candidate for film than AVENGERS. My only knowledge or reference is the old Saturday morning cartoon, of which the less said, the better.

We've had the popularity among the general population discussion before. Before the Avengers and the MCU, it looked like this (in my opinion)

A+ Batman, Superman, Spiderman

A  Wonder Woman, Wolverine, Hulk

A- Flash, Aquaman, Green Lantern, Captain America

B Iron Man, Thor, Fantastic Four, Punisher 

The JLA is stacked with well known characters. The Avengers had to make their characters more well known. It's not that the JLA is better or worse, but their name recognition is way higher

ETA: My opinion again, but there is a steep drop off in recognition once you get outside the big names. Marvel has a deeper bench, but DC has the power up top.

Yep, go back a decade or so and the mainstream would be asking "who?" to the Avengers other than Hulk and Captain America. With Justice League, the classic lineup is six characters everyone's at least heard the names of, plus Martian Manhunter.
 

To me, the best way to do...Justice, to DC's...League is with this Pantheon of...Heroes!

Batman

Wonder Woman

Superman

Green Lantern

Flash (Barry Allen)

Green Arrow

Black Canary

Quote:

Originally Posted by bendrix 

 

Plus telepathy and phasing.

 

The actual question should be, "What does Superman do that Martian Manhunter can't?" The answer is nothing.

Except be fireproof and not suffer a crippling addiction to Oreo cookies.

I know that Superman, Batman, The Flash, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, and Martian Manhunter were apart of the lineup of the previous canned JLA movie.  Was Aquaman though?

Also, the villains were Talia al Ghul and some random rich dude.

Count me in on a new team member being our surrogate into this world.  Start with the team firmly established and doing good across the globe individually, with someone at HQ feeding out assignments.  Then introduce a big baddie that causes them to work together for the first time.  If it does well, then they can spin them off into their own solo films and possibly show the origins of the lesser-known characters there if they want, flashback-style.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fafhrd 

Except be fireproof and not suffer a crippling addiction to Oreo cookies.

In the inevitable Marvel/DC crossover movie we can see a faceoff of Martian Manhunter and his Oreos vs. Captain America and his delicious, creamy Cup Cakes!

Shit, even in the Snack Wars Marvel wins!

Marvel not only setup origin stories in their standalone movies, but they established their world/universe and planned things such that everything preceding the Avengers leveraged all that work. Iron Man's personality, the tragedy of the Hulk, the craziness of the Cube and Asgard. Heck, Captain America led us straight into the Avengers movie. They had the luxury of building up to it, DC won't have that.

I think pulling JLA is more difficult than the Avengers because of the characters in the DC universe, but the JLA cartoon was excellent and provides some ideas for a movie that could work. Unfortunately, I don't think WB is ready to use those ideas in a cinematic effort; like sometimes elevating and focusing on obscure but interesting characters, and populating the JLA cartoon world with so many heroes.

Brad Bird has to be high on WB's wishlist, even if he is off doing the super-secret 1952* thing for Disney.  He's as good a fit to the DC sensibility as Whedon is to Marvel. 

*There's an alternate universe where 1952 is the codename for a Brad Bird version of The New Frontier.  The main part of that story gets going in '52.

Brad Bird is a stroke of genius!

What if there was a massive prologue, in the same vein of the prologue in the Fellowship of the Ring, that would completely introduce everything the audience needs in order to get the story going?

If WB/DC is worried about the perception of copying Marvel's set up, why not just go big right from the gate?  That prologue that began the Fellowship of the Ring is so good, you don't need the Hobbit prequels we're about to get.

The same technique could be used here to get pass doing origins for certain other characters.

Don Swoosh, In addition to a Prologue, which I think is a...Super Idea, the heroes could be introduced using their powers, with the name of the actor and hero he or she is playing.  It could also be like a James Bond Film where there is a...10 minute action sequence, and then the rest of the film begins.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Swoosh 

What if there was a massive prologue, in the same vein of the prologue in the Fellowship of the Ring, that would completely introduce everything the audience needs in order to get the story going?

 

If WB/DC is worried about the perception of copying Marvel's set up, why not just go big right from the gate?  That prologue that began the Fellowship of the Ring is so good, you don't need the Hobbit prequels we're about to get.

 

The same technique could be used here to get pass doing origins for certain other characters.

I'm kind of surprised more superhero movies don't go this route.

Or conversely, more superhero movies could easily go the route of Spider-Man 2:  Imagine some Alex Ross-painted splash-panels over the opening credits illustrating in just a few beats the origins of Superman, Batman, The Flash, and Green Lantern.  (Those four at least are easy to sum up in a few splash pages).  Or take the "Watchmen" route and make the beats live-action.  Either way many of these characters' origins are well-known and/or simple enough that they can be very briefly summarized and the rest of the film can move on.

I leave out Wonder Woman because A:  There's less iconic imagery associated with her origin than some of the other heroes, and B:  I'd use Wonder Woman as the "rookie" character for the film...essentially the character that's being newly introduced.  Why?  Because she's the one that arguably needs that kind of boost the most, and origin/storyline wise it could make a reasonable amount of sense for her to be "late to the party" so to speak.  But in a nutshell a JLA movie would strive to do for Wonder Woman what Avengers did for The Hulk: Re-affirm the character in the public's mind and make her "awesome."

Jmacq1, Not just Awesome, Diana needs to be full of...Wonder, as a Woman, a Hero, and a Princess as well!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jmacq1 

I'm kind of surprised more superhero movies don't go this route.

 

Or conversely, more superhero movies could easily go the route of Spider-Man 2:  Imagine some Alex Ross-painted splash-panels over the opening credits illustrating in just a few beats the origins of Superman, Batman, The Flash, and Green Lantern.  (Those four at least are easy to sum up in a few splash pages).  Or take the "Watchmen" route and make the beats live-action.  Either way many of these characters' origins are well-known and/or simple enough that they can be very briefly summarized and the rest of the film can move on.

 

I leave out Wonder Woman because A:  There's less iconic imagery associated with her origin than some of the other heroes, and B:  I'd use Wonder Woman as the "rookie" character for the film...essentially the character that's being newly introduced.  Why?  Because she's the one that arguably needs that kind of boost the most, and origin/storyline wise it could make a reasonable amount of sense for her to be "late to the party" so to speak.  But in a nutshell a JLA movie would strive to do for Wonder Woman what Avengers did for The Hulk: Re-affirm the character in the public's mind and make her "awesome."

Absolutely money.  Considering we've seen Batman and Superman countless times and the fact that the general audience has a working knowledge of Green Lantern from last year, Wonder Woman would be in the "in" for the audience.  Combine that with some type of massive pre-credits prologue (choose which one of your suggestions) and I think you could get away with not having to do origins films, leading up to Justice League.

I mean, think back to the prologue of the Fellowship of the Ring, what did it NOT set up so that general audiences (myself included back in '01) could understand what was about to be witnessed?

This gives WB the chance to not only set up the Justice League series as it's own continuity, you could possibly get away with having these characters in their own solo projects that's not in continuity with the Justice League.

The biggest hurdle I see is how does Snyder's Man of Steel fit into WB's plans.  In all honesty, it's actually a bad thing that we're getting a modern day Superman reboot at the same time WB wants to do Justice League.  If Man of Steel didn't exist, the Justice League epic would be the absolute perfect way to introduce the entire DC Universe.  One massive scale, epic three hour film that gets the ball rolling for future solo projects.  With Nolan's Batman ending and Green Lantern tanking, using Justice League is the perfect opportunity to do this.

It's not a 1:1 analogy of LOTR prologue and JLA prologue. The LOTR prologue didn't set the table, it just told you when and where the table was, the history of the table, why the table is important. A JLA prologue would have to put all of the meals on the table, ready to be eaten.

I need breakfast.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI 

It's not a 1:1 analogy of LOTR prologue and JLA prologue. The LOTR prologue didn't set the table, it just told you when and where the table was, the history of the table, why the table is important. A JLA prologue would have to put all of the meals on the table, ready to be eaten.

 

I need breakfast.

Agreed.  But, you could at least introduce the world of the Justice League, a world where heroes of this kind are needed, along with the potential threat that would get these characters together, with Wonder Woman, like the Hobbits, as the "in" for the audience.

It can work, considering that most people know Superman, Batman, and Green Lantern.  Hell, not only Wonder Woman as the "in" but the Flash as well.  Either way, a massive prologue could set the world.  We just need one or two characters to follow to get to the others characters we DO know.

Hell, you could go the route that Singer took on the first X-Men picture.  While not the same, I don't think anyone was complaining about why we didn't get origins for Jean, Scott, Storm, or Xavier.

The "in" was Wolverine and Rogue and we got to know the others as well as the villains and the world as the story progressed. 

Same thing here, considering the popularity of Superman and Batman, with the knowledge of Lantern from last summer, no matter how audiences felt about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Swoosh 

Hell, you could go the route that Singer took on the first X-Men picture.  While not the same, I don't think anyone was complaining about why we didn't get origins for Jean, Scott, Storm, or Xavier.

One of the great things about X-Men's set up is that you don't need an explanation for why they are super-powered. "Born this way" boom, done.  Whereas it's more confusing if we're supposed to intuit the difference between a Kryptonian, an Amazon, a Martian(?) and a guy with an alien (though non-Kryptonian, non-Martian) power ring, and whatever Hawkman and Aquaman are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jmacq1 

I leave out Wonder Woman because A:  There's less iconic imagery associated with her origin than some of the other heroes, and B:  I'd use Wonder Woman as the "rookie" character for the film...essentially the character that's being newly introduced.  Why?  Because she's the one that arguably needs that kind of boost the most, and origin/storyline wise it could make a reasonable amount of sense for her to be "late to the party" so to speak.  But in a nutshell a JLA movie would strive to do for Wonder Woman what Avengers did for The Hulk: Re-affirm the character in the public's mind and make her "awesome."

Disagreed. I think Wonder Woman should be the Thor of this group, late entry, intimidating, powerful as hell. I think she's always been one of the more powerful ones in the Justice League, and she's a cultural touchstone of a character, so her just showing up and kicking ass should be all you really need. She's a kick-ass Amazonian, the end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

 

One of the great things about X-Men's set up is that you don't need an explanation for why they are super-powered. "Born this way" boom, done.  Whereas it's more confusing if we're supposed to intuit the difference between a Kryptonian, an Amazon, a Martian(?) and a guy with an alien (though non-Kryptonian, non-Martian) power ring, and whatever Hawkman and Aquaman are.

Howbout THE INCREDIBLES then? Or does a pastiche/homage not need the hand-holding?

The prologue should just be a title card that reads:

GO READ  A FUCKING COMIC BOOK!