ToastyPotato posted:Yeah, I mean, outside of the Simpsons, have voice actors ever successfully fought for increased rates? I imagine VA contracts are way cheaper than actor contracts. Also, does syndication even make that much money these days? It probably might, if international syndication is a thing I guess, but I would imagine ratings for your run of the mill daily reruns are dropped through the floor considering that primetime ratings for new episodes have all but collapsed in the past 10 years. I'd imagine piracy and DVD collections have made syndication a lot less profitable for everyone involved.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I'd imagine piracy and DVD collections have made syndication a lot less profitable for everyone involved. I'd say legit streaming, DVD collections, and the fact that there are like 10 different cable networks that show syndicated shows at any given time probably have done far more damage than piracy could possibly hope to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:I'd say legit streaming, DVD collections, and the fact that there are like 10 different cable networks that show syndicated shows at any given time probably have done far more damage than piracy could possibly hope to. I believe that's why networks have started websites for individual shows just to track what network on what day reruns are on. So if you wanted to watch The Middle, you check that website because it will be on every single day, though maybe on different channels/at different times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/warner-bros-finds-wonder-woman-661991?mobile_redirect=false So on the one hand, I guess this kills any chance of a Wonder Woman TV show, since she is going to be in the next Superman Movie, on the other hand, she doesn't seem very Amazonian at all... Is she going to Christian Bale herself into the role? Also, I assume WB wouldn't continue interest in a TV show when a movie actress was already cast for the role in their next big film... But then again, they are creating an ever expanding TV universe within Arrow that already includes multiple other Justice Leaguers... Who knows what the hell they are thinking anymore?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/warner-bros-finds-wonder-woman-661991?mobile_redirect=false DC just strikes me as doing anything without a real overall plan. I don't think they want to make one single overarching universe like marvel. They have movie money and tv money and that's all it is. That said, tossing wonder woman into the superman movie just seems odd. So in the enxt movie you have to introduce lex, wonder woman, the new batman, and whatever else. It's going to be convoluted as gently caress and really not a superman movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 13:37
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I'd imagine piracy and DVD collections have made syndication a lot less profitable for everyone involved. The bigger thing right now is that there is no channel anywhere that doesn't rely on either some paid programming, syndicated content, or non-original content. Take AMC which has big shows, but makes a good deal of its money off of movies that don't cost too much. There is always going to be airtime to fill and syndicated reruns will be a viable option until the house of cards collapses altogether. I think you are seeing a little more narrow of a field in what shows are picked up though. How I Met Your Mother for example is way over syndicated. In my neck of the woods, it airs on like five channels. Kids networks are a bit different though. Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network, and Disney have seemed to move further and further away from airing unoriginal content. I think you can "blame" that on Nickelodeon producing shows in the 90s that had an aesthetic and branding which really made it clear what channel they were airing on. So, they do function a bit differently than a lot of channels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 14:28
|
|
|
Morand posted:DC just strikes me as doing anything without a real overall plan. I don't think they want to make one single overarching universe like marvel. They have movie money and tv money and that's all it is. I seem to remember folks at D.C.saying their characters were so iconic they didn't need to have a shared universe. I think this was around when MoS or green lantern was coming out, well before they decided to shove everyone into MoS 2
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 15:08
|
|
|
GL looked like it was desperately trying to set up a shared universe with Amanda Waller.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
greatn posted:GL looked like it was desperately trying to set up a shared universe with Amanda Waller. Yeah, it was pretty clear she was supposed to be their Nick Fury that connected all the films.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 15:16
|
|
|
To be fair, it wouldn't be the first time DC said a bald-faced lie in order to show how different they are from Marvel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 15:18
|
|
|
Morand posted:That said, tossing wonder woman into the superman movie just seems odd. So in the enxt movie you have to introduce lex, wonder woman, the new batman, and whatever else. It's going to be convoluted as gently caress and really not a superman movie. At this point, DC and WB are probably pretty desperate. They see Marvel/Disney getting one hit after another while they get mediocre result at nest, unless its Batman. You can bet that originally, MoS 2 had neither Batman nor any other Superhero in its story, but since the movie wasn't Ironman, they, yet again, don't have a basis to launch their own shared universe. Seriously, the universe idea was a pretty big gamble by Marvel, but since it worked out, it's absolutely genius, because it basically let's them introduce any property without to much trouble, because the foundation is already there. At the same time, the different movies stand well enough on their own that you don't have to see them all to understand them. Kind of reminds me of the "Do you want to know more" system from Starship Trooper. "Do you want to know more about these nordic gods that left a powerful artifact for the Nazis? Watch Thor". Thinking about it, that might be the problem of AoS. WB on the other hand has nothing and they don't have the successful movie to attach the less well know heroes to ( I doubt that Thor would have had the same success if it wasn't attached to the Avenger idea. I like the movie, but without the Superhero tie-in, it's basically just another "epic" fantasy movie they keep pumping out every year since LotR). They gave the director of their biggest success free hand and in return, he made his hero as unsuited for a broader heroic universe as possible. Nolan's Batman would work better in an Expendables sequel than a Justice League movie. Bottom line, they're kind of out of option. Marvel will continue to churn out superhero movies for every property they own, until the market is saturated and the interested declines, while WB struggles to get people to watch a movie that doesn't include the two biggest superheroes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 15:25
|
|
|
Dacap posted:Yeah, it was pretty clear she was supposed to be their Nick Fury that connected all the films.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 15:41
|
|
|
Would have been if Green Lantern didn't crater in theaters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:Would have been if Green Lantern didn't crater in theaters. Maybe if they had actually made a good movie. Anyway, for actual TV stuff, last night's Arrow introduced Barry Allen and he was a lot of fun. There's a little bit of Silver Age in him as he's constantly late for everything. Also the show was just taunting people last night because they had a scene with Barry climbing on a shelf full of dangerous chemicals while you heard lightning in the background.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:09
|
|
|
Green Lantern was 2 or 3 above average movies focus grouped into 1 lovely one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Maybe if they had actually made a good movie. I think part of that is that they were going to have Barry become the Flash in Arrow but decided against it and have moved his origin off to his own show. Also the fact that this was the first episode Geoff Johns co-wrote.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
redbackground posted:That would have been a perfect way to do it, too. Buuuut, DC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:13
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Eh, I think Amanda should always be a subversive not central element in the DC Universe. Marvel's push in the last few years to make SHIELD the center of the Marvel Universe in its different incarnations makes sense for Marvel especially when the de facto leader of the Marvel superheroes is a soldier. I don't think it works as well for DC. Amanda and the corner of the DC Universe she usually lives in is cool because it's this dingy and shady corner of a world built around Superman's optimism. When you make her the center, she's a low-rate Nick Fury at best.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Anyway, for actual TV stuff, last night's Arrow introduced Barry Allen and he was a lot of fun. There's a little bit of Silver Age in him as he's constantly late for everything. Also the show was just taunting people last night because they had a scene with Barry climbing on a shelf full of dangerous chemicals while you heard lightning in the background. Dumb poo poo like this is hard to get right, but Arrow tends to nail it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Maybe if they had actually made a good movie. That doesn't seem to be necessary to make a billion dollars and craft your big web of shared universes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:That doesn't seem to be necessary to make a billion dollars and craft your big web of shared universes. Nobody wants to touch a failure. That's a pretty good general rule, but it gets iron clad in dysfunctional places like DC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:04
|
|
|
StumblyWumbly posted:Nobody wants to touch a failure. That's a pretty good general rule, but it gets iron clad in dysfunctional places like DC. I bet this is why the X-Men movies have been all Wolverene all the time with a small side of new origins.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:08
|
|
Aphrodite posted:That doesn't seem to be necessary to make a billion dollars and craft your big web of shared universes. Yeah, popular things suck.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
StumblyWumbly posted:Nobody wants to touch a failure. That's a pretty good general rule, but it gets iron clad in dysfunctional places like DC. Oh I know they couldn't continue off it, I just meant that Marvel is doing pretty well even though only a couple of the movies in the whole thing were well received. I guess they did start off with one that was, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
Yeah, the 2003 Hulk movie had similar worldwide box office returns to the 2011 Green Lantern movie (although on a lower budget) and most sites give them similar ratings. I'm guessing that the '03 Hulk was testing the waters to check the viability for a shared cinematic universe and was so crappy that Marvel went back to the drawing board and rebooted it 5 years later, slipping it into theatres about a month after Iron Man. The '08 Hulk still failed to break even in the US market and only earned slightly more than the '03 film, probably less if you take inflation into account. I think that DC's biggest mistake was to not have Nolan's Batman trilogy lead into Batman vs Superman but The Dark Knight Rises was released only a few months after The Avengers so they wouldn't have known that shared universes could be super profitable when they were wrapping it up. Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
Hulk was Universal, Iron Man was the first Marvel movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
StumblyWumbly posted:Hulk was Universal, Iron Man was the first Marvel movie. Ugh, of course it was, I'm a dope. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Hulk was the superhero film that fans deserved, but not the one they needed. vvv True that. McSpanky fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Dec 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
Hulk was better than fans deserved.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
Hulk wasn't as smart a film as it clearly wanted to be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
That criticism isn't as smart as it wasn't to be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:33
|
|
|
Rehashing again whether hulk was good or bad isn't as interesting as it wants to be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
Hulk hammer throwing one tank and stalking towards another with the destroyed turret of different tank was only ever topped by the "puny god" scene in Avengers. Edit: poo poo, I thought this was the movie thread. \/\/\/That was cool! Soonmot fucked around with this message at 04:20 on Dec 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
Soonmot posted:Hulk hammer throwing one tank and stalking towards another with the destroyed turret of different tank was only ever topped by the "puny god" scene in Avengers. I liked the ripped up car hulk hands bit that they stole from the Ultimate Destruction game too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
Dacap posted:I liked the ripped up car hulk hands bit that they stole from the Ultimate Destruction game too. That for real might be my favorite part in any of the Marvel movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 04:32
|
|
|
I finally got my hands on Mike Grells Green Arrow run and am really digging some of the references they pulled from it, it's very very different in tone of the show but there's some obvious parallels. I really hope they go the route in the book with Ollie. It's really great. edit: DC also doesn't have Marvel's unified vision by Avi Arad ( I think he's still in charge and that is how he spelled his name). I mean MArvel definitively knows where they are going with their movies and DC doesn't have a loving clue. Disney is from what I understand rather hands off with Marvel only in the supporting and taking the cash scheme of things. They have all this other poo poo on their plate with Star Wars etc.. so yeah. I think it has more to do with the fact that Warner Bros. owns DC. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 07:54 on Dec 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 07:49
|
|
|
Avi Arad's vision is what gave us Spider-Man 3. He stepped down from Marvel Studio's in '06 though he still gets it think exec producer credits on Marvel films.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 12:24
|
|
|
Kevin Feige is the big man at Marvel Studios.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
Marvel movies also take on comic writers as script advisors. I think the first Spider-Man did add well but I don't know if Nolan did for Batman. Green Lantern did have Johns advising...
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
This sounds dreadful:quote:Looks like Gotham will show us a part of Bruce Wayne's life we've only glimpsed. http://ca.ign.com/articles/2013/12/07/young-bruce-wayne-will-be-a-series-regular-on-gotham Arrow picked a good time to air between the comicbook excitement and impending saturation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2013 18:01
|
|