Superhero films and where they're going, part 2

If there is one thing that DC Entertainment has got Marvel beat, it's that its got all of it's property under one roof. Warner Brothers has the exclusive rights to any and everything DC Comics. Marvel on the other hand looks this this...

Thanks to Stan Lee selling off just about everything in the 70s and 80's, Marvel characters are spread out over 5 studios. There is a bit of a crossover as the Scarlett Witch and her brother Quicksilver fall under the domain of Marvel Studios and 20th Century Fox. The pair will make an appearance in the end credit easter egg of Captain America: The Winter Soldier but the word "mutant" cannot be used in anything outside of Fox as they have exclusive rights to the word. Having five different studios control the characters is one of the main reasons why Marvel can churn out franchises at a machine gun pace.

Which brings us back to DC Entertainment. Batman is it's cash cow. Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight trilogy has grossed over $2.45 billion worldwide in box office receipts. That doesn't include DVD and merchandise purchases. Batman will most likely go on a bit of a hiatus until someone decides its time for a reboot. I'll compare that to the Iron Man franchise because they're both about a wealthy dude in a cool suit that fights crime and they take place over the same time period, 2005-12 for Batman and 2008-13 for Iron Man. Iron Man has grossed $2.42 billion worldwide at the box office (neither are adjusted for inflation). So they're pretty close. In 2006 Warner Brothers rebooted Superman and released Superman Returns to the tune of $391 million worldwide. Not bad right? Sure but the foreign gross was barely equal to the domestic gross (that matters a real lot to studios) and quite frankly the movie was bad. This prompted DC/Warner Bros. to re-reboot Superman in 2013 with Man of Steel and it grossed $668 million worldwide. It was a better film by far (it could have used another round in the editing room) but all of the four Spider-Man films released between 2002-13 grossed more than Man of Steel (even the much maligned Spider-Man 3 made $891 million worldwide and a lot of people hated it!).

Since it appears that the Superman ship has been righted, there is a sequel planned (what a surprise!). This time DC is going to hedge its bets by placing Batman in the film which is entitled, "Untitled Superman-Batman Project (pretty catchy right?)." Since Marvel's The Avengers grossed over $1.5 billion worldwide, DC needs to put is money makers together. As an added bonus, Wonder Woman will also be appearing. That is correct, DC's holy trinity in the same film! This will then lead into 2017's alleged Justice League film which David S. Goyer is under contract to write. The Justice League coming to the big screen has been brandied about the internet for years and with the other worldly box office success of The Avengers, DC has to do something and the terribleness of 2011's Green Lantern cannot deter them. There are an abundant amount of rumors as to who will round out the Justice League and who knows (it can still fall apart) but it should be interesting. Shoot I'll be pushing 50 by the time it comes out but I am so there for the opening.

Since the only thing the DC/Warner has in the chute for the near future, let's talk about Wonder Woman for a moment. One of the major issues bringing Wonder Woman to the big screen is that she's not that far removed from being a female version of Superman. Ability to fly, super strength, invulnerability and the tendency to use brawn first and brains second (both WW and Supes are intelligent but that can get in the way of punching things). So for now we will need to see what happens in smaller roles in male orientated films before she gets a chance at a stand alone film.

Israeli born actress Gal Cadot has been cast as the Amazon Princess...

Since she's Israeli, its a given that she can more handle the ass kicking part of the character. In 2011, ABC tried to bring Wonder Woman to television and the pilot was never aired. There's a lot of reasons I'm sure why it never got off the ground but quite frankly someone may have realized that it seemed very similar to NBC's the Bionic Woman which lasted for 8 underwhelming episodes in 2007 (the fact that the networks were trying to reboot long dead shows about with a super powered female lead makes me scratch my head. Not to mention a Charlie's Angels reboot in 2011 which lasted around 4 episodes). I also don't know what plans they had for the show but they could've taken the high road like they did with Smallville and Arrow by concentrating on character development. The WB aired Birds of Prey in 2002 but the ratings declined and the show was cancelled after 13 episodes. Which leads me to believe that a show about empowered female heroes doesn't translate well to the tv audience. It seems stupid but that's where we are at I guess which is too bad. The premise of Birds of Prey could easily work, it's a show about ass-kicking female vigilantes who are led by a wheelchair bound former ass-kicking vigilante who's an expert computer hacker. But what do I know? In the end I'm just a guy typing on his computer reposting pictures of Wonder Woman in a silly blog.

Adrianne Palicki from the 2011 pilot. Some people didn't like the pants. Is that really worth getting into a twist over?

The ass kicking badass from Cartoon Network's Justice League.

Lynda Carter from the series which ran for 60 episodes from 1975-79.

Then there's Cathy Lee Crosby in this little known gem from a 1974 made for tv film...

I saw this once as a kid and it was terrible. As an adult I can see why it was never picked up even by 1970's standards (it was a problem in the Marvel Universe as well). Quite frankly the outfit looks as if her next stop is the roller rink for some Roller Derby. Apparently there was a strange story arc in the comics that led to this hunk of turd.

The new rumor is that a Wonder Woman film is on life support. A lot will depend on what happens with the Batman/Superman film. We'll see what happens.

The Knicks and Melo, it keeps getting better.

It's real easy these days to take shots at the New York Knickerbockers and it won't be any different here. In fact its almost impossible not to bash the Knicks (like I kind of did back in November). Going into the All-Star break the Knicks are 20-32 (yet miraculously still in the playoff hunt), Mike Woodson's job is in jeopardy and the Melo rumors are heating up.

Recently, Syracuse head coach Jim Boeheim came out and said that Melo should leave the Knicks because its in the best interest of his legacy (of which he has none at the moment). Earlier in the season Melo mentioned that he was looking to opt-out of his gargantuan contract and test free agency. He quickly backtracked off the remarks but the damage was done. A few weeks ago his wife La La said in an interview that Melo was definitely staying in New York despite what a lot of writers (and his college coach) felt. It seems pretty clear that the Knicks (mainly owner James Dolan) and Melo are going to all go down together, seeing how the Knicks are a sinking ship. Everyone knows how badly the Knicks finances are screwed up and that there will be no relief in sight until after the 2015 season.

Over All-Star weekend, Melo was nice enough to tell reporters what it would take to return next season. Whether it be taking less money (which doesn't happen in the NBA) or jumping in the driver's seat with management to lay the groundwork for acquiring talent, Melo will be there to help. Is there anyone out there that thinks that will happen? Of course not. First off, Melo's agents will not let him take less money from the Knicks since he can make more money with them. Secondly, when has a player ever helped a GM get talent? "What about LeBron and D-Wade conspiring together? Didn't they do just that? Not to mention Wade, Bosh and LeBron all took less money." While that last statement is true it's a little different. LeBron and D-Wade make a gazillion dollars outside of the NBA. Bosh wanted out of Toronto so bad he took the maximum a free agent can get by signing with another team. Plus, people want to play with LeBron and D-Wade (probably more LeBron that Wade but whatever). Ray Allen took less money to play in Miami for example (though his "relationship" with Rajon Rondo may have been a huge factor as well).

Players would rather play with Kobe Bryant, despite the fact he shoots a lot and he's a jerk! Kobe would happily stab his grandmother in order to win and other players know that (he's on a Michael Jordan level with that point). Melo is a great scorer but he hasn't shown over time that he will do everything necessary in order to win. Like pounding the glass, passing or playing defense . Plus, NO ONE wants to play with Melo and Melo doesn't like to share the spotlight, just ask Jeremy Lin. The Knicks feel they can land Kevin love in 2015 but I don't see it happening. It's possible because Love appears to be a rather unselfish player who excels at rebounding but as miserable as he may be in Minnesota, the Knicks are not the answer. He can do better. Players and their reps know that the Knicks are a disaster and will stay away at all costs.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out and should be more interesting until Dwight Howard starts his free agent nonsense again in a few years. Thanks for your time.

Superhero Films and where they're going, part 1

2014 will feature several superhero/comic book films. The big titles are from Marvel Studios which will be releasing Captain America: The Winter Soldier in April, in May we get The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and X-Men: Days of Future Past and finally there will be Guardians of the Galaxy in August. Despite the huge success of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy and Man of Steel, Marvel Studios is kicking DC Entertainment's ass (a quick scan through wikipedia shows that their next feature appears to be the Batman vs. Superman in 2016). Understandably Marvel is will ride Iron Man, Thor, Spider-Man and the X-Men into the ground. Why not? Those properties have made boatloads of money worldwide. One of the things that make me scratch my head is the Guardians of the Galaxy film. I collected comics from around 1983-1992 and I consider myself knowledgable of what went on in that era but I am vaguely familiar with this group. The group first appeared in 1969 and was scene sporadically in different titles throughout the 70's. Then they got their own title in 1992 and ran until 1995. This is a fringe group at best (I do not remember seeing them in any of the X-Men titles I subscribed to nor the Fantastic Four) and they're getting their own film. Make no mistake, I will most likely see this but it's not a given as X-Men: Days of Future Past.

While I wonder about the following for the Guardians film (it may be huge for all I know but admittedly I'm outdated) one that really leaves me dumbfounded is Ant-Man. This has been on my mind for some time and after reading this article, I decided to spend a few minutes to relay my thoughts. Ant-Man first appeared in issue #27 of Tales to Astonish in 1962 and is a founding member of the Avengers. Ant-Man was the crime fighting alter-ego of biochemist Henry Pym and as you may have already guessed his "power" was mind control of ants and the ability to shrink down the the size of an ant. As Ant-Man, Pym faced many deadly foes but also had to watch out for people stepping on him and of course the things all dog fear the most...vacuum cleaners!

The look of horror on his face says it all.

That's right, this hero who got sucked into a vacuum cleaner in a story is getting his own film. Also, Ant-Man started out in 1962 and by 1964 Pym got rid of the Ant-Man duds to become Giant-Man (it was to impress a girl. Given). The next Avengers installment, the villain will be Ultron. 

In the Marvel Universe Ultron's creator is Hank Pym so I can see why they need to Pym into the story line but do we really need to have an Ant-Man film? That answer is no. Ant-Man wasn't popular enough to hold onto his own title and different people donned the helmet and none of them were able to gain a substantial foothold in the Marvel Universe. Ant-Man became a punchline in a SNL skit from over 30 years ago. Margot Kidder was the guest and the skit was a dinner party at Lois Lane's apartment. The guests include Superman/Clark Kent (played by Bill Murray), The Flash (Aykroyd), The Hulk (Belushi) and Ant-Man (Garret Morris). The Flash & Hulk get Ant-Man try to strike up a conversation with Ant-Man then make fun of him when he describes his "powers." The Hulu clip is unavailable but here's a screen cap...

L to R: Aykroyd, Morris and Belushi

With the upcoming Captain America: The Winter Soldier film, its rumored that the easter egg in the credits will feature the Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. 

Quicksilver is the dude and the little girl is the Scarlet Witch. They both started out in Magneto's Brotherhood of Mutants back in 1963 but eventually saw the error of their ways and turned to fighting crime. Both became Avengers in issue #16 in 1965. Quicksilver is the speedster in the Marvel Universe (everyone's got to have a guy that can run really, really fast right?) and the Scarlet With is a witch...

The weird stuff emerging from her hand is a hint in case her name didn't give it away.

The point is that these are more minor characters in the Marvel Universe. Quicksilver (who was always portrayed as a bag of douche in my day) married into the Inhumans and Scarlett Witch married an android. Neither one ever had the popularity or depth to carry their own title. Hell, even the villain from Thor: Dark World wasn't a major player is the Asgardian world. When I saw the film I thought, "who the hell is Malekith?" It turns out he was a villain in a brief story arc during Walt Simonson's run on The Mighty Thor from 1983-1987.

He was in 10 issues between '84-'86 then didn't appear again until 1995. A major player obviously.

I also didn't know who in the hell the Collector (a Guardians of the Galaxy tie-in) was either when they had the post credit excerpt. I read a lot of comics in the 80's and went to a lot of comic conventions but I do not remember the Collector at all. Maybe all this will tie together nicely when the Avengers sequel comes out in 2015 but who knows. In the future the Fantastic Four are getting a reboot and there have been rumors about Doctor Strange (don't confuse him with Doctor Fate) getting a film but I have no idea how true that is. There was attempt to bring Dr. Strange to the small screen (back when Stan Lee was selling off the rights anyone with a wad of cash) in 1978 and it gave us this...

The effects were terrible but the budget was very low and the show tanked (as did the live action The Amazing Spider-Man series from the same era).

Is it really necessary to saturate the market? Dumb question, of course it is. Until there's a real bomb or a string of box offices failures they'll keep churning them out. The bottom will drop out of the genre (these things are cyclical) eventually but when has Hollywood ever put their foot on the brake when there is money to be made.

In part 2 I will go into what is going on in the DC Universe. They can't get anything outside of Batman to work right though Man of Steel was a good film. Thanks for your time.