Justice League movie coming in 2013?

Warner Bros' new President seems to think so

After much back-and-forthing, Warner Bros have hinted they're looking to launch a Justice League film - and soon!

Jeff Robinov, who takes the WB Presidential oath this week, has been a big influence in the industry for some time.

He was, after all, the one who persuaded Chris Nolan to include the Batmobile in Batman Begins.

Now, according to an interview with the LA Times, he plans to see the superhero ensemble take to the screen in 2013.

Whilst this is very exciting stuff, the prospect of a 2013 release may seem a little implausible with The Dark Knight Rises and Superman: Man of Steel remaining the studio's focus until the end of 2012.

Take with a few grains of salt for now, but with The Avengers hitting cinemas next year, a Justice League movie definitely seems more of an inevitability than a possibility.

What do you reckon? Super, man or bad, man? Let us know your thoughts below...

Comments

    • KingofSpain

      Mar 29th 2011, 12:25

      Flash! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Bring it. As an ensemble it makes much more sense than The Avengers and I imagine would translate to the big screen easily enough. However, the only way they'll hit 2013 is if the Green Lantern doesn't bomb, and they somehow sort out a Flash movie in double quick time. Would they also consider tying the movies together much in the way Marvel have been doing? Seeing as though Batman 1+2 are complete stand alones and Superman/Green Lantern/Batman 3 are already in production I very much doubt it. I can't see Chris Nolan allowing the studio to shoehorn anything into his last Batman script, Snyder maybe. If I was Jeff, I'd have released all the stand alone films for each character and then I would produce a 5 minute viral which has Superman sending out invites to the other characters, so you'd see Alfred delivering a note to Bruce, etc and they all read what he has to say. And then you'd cut to them arriving at HQ and are greeted by Superman. That would be it.

      Alert a moderator

    • SiMan

      Mar 29th 2011, 13:59

      I'm not so sure that the DC universe translates to film as well as the Marvel one does in terms of 'grouping' the heroes together. The tone of Nolan's Batman films would not seem to fit in with The Green Lantern, or even Superman for that matter. I just don't think it would work as well on screen as the Marvel films look like they will

      Alert a moderator

    • SiMan

      Mar 29th 2011, 13:59

      I'm not so sure that the DC universe translates to film as well as the Marvel one does in terms of 'grouping' the heroes together. The tone of Nolan's Batman films would not seem to fit in with The Green Lantern, or even Superman for that matter. I just don't think it would work as well on screen as the Marvel films look like they will

      Alert a moderator

    • GarthMarenghi

      Mar 29th 2011, 14:00

      Okay, pet peeve time. Batman Begins is not 'Batman 1' and Dark Knight Rises is not 'Batman 3'. You might not like them, but show some respect to the previous iterations of the franchise, the people who made them and the people who like them. Calling Begins the first Batman film is like calling Casino Royale 'Bond 1' - narratively correct, yes, but historically, no.

      Alert a moderator

    • GarthMarenghi

      Mar 29th 2011, 14:03

      Back on topic, what does this mean for casting? We're to assume that it will be a new Batman in Justice League, (Armie Hammer from The Social Network was cast initially, wasn't he?) if so, does that mean that it'll be yet another Superman? Nolan doesn't want his heroes to cross over, so as he's in charge of Man Of Steel, I doubt he'd want the continuity of that separate series getting muddled with a side-franchise like JL. Opens up interesting questions and possibilities, anyway...

      Alert a moderator

    • GarthMarenghi

      Mar 29th 2011, 14:09

      One last thing, Wonder Woman is the big problem for me on this, or any live action project actually. How can you include her in anything you expect people to take at least moderately seriously when her costume is so ludicrous? Have you seen the first stills of the new TV series lead for David E. Kelley's Wonder Woman? I mean, she's got the norks, you've gotta give her that, but she looks completely daft in that outfit. They'd need to find a totally new approach to the design, probably one that showed far less flesh than my fellow perverts would like, I'm afraid.

      Alert a moderator

    • therealeverton

      Mar 29th 2011, 15:24

      I can't see any logic in the suggestion that DC's superhero team makes any more sense than Marvel's Avengers? Especially when Marvel have, masterfully, set up a 6 year mulit-movie $800m+ plan to get The Avengers characters onscreen, known to the wider public, not just to look at but who they are and what powers / personalities they have; even rehabilitating The Hulk (previously considered their second favourite haracter amongst Joe / Jane public, before Ang Lee's movie tainted the character for many. Having done well so far and looking likely to finish that with positive reactions to Thor and Captain America, so far, they are far better set up than DC. Let's not forget that DC scrapped their original plan, after writer;s strikes delayed it, to bring out a JL movie hoping that people would turn up out of love for Superman (whose wider popularity, as opposed to fame) hasn't been proven in his past THREE movies and Wonder Woman; a character many recognise, but as said abovee despise her ludicrous costume(s) and, again, we have no idea they care to see in a movie and a bunch of other characters that non comic book readers or kids' toon watchers have never even been heard of by the wider public. So last I heard the idea was to folllow Marvel Studios' blueprint, with Green Lantern effectively being their Iron Man, and Man of Steel the continuation of that. Nolan's Batman films are no longer relevent as that cycle finishes with next year's movie. So a new Batman, in a world that fits with Lantern, Superman & co could be started; it could even be launch by having the neww Batman in the JL movie. The big problem remains that a Batman that exists with the likes of Superman , Flash & co tends to feel a little more Schumacher and a lot less Nolan / Burton. The Abengers will gross over $1b though and there's no way Warners will let that much potential go walk about. It's also easy to see that the nature of extended cameos in solo Avengers movies and the ever changing roster of heroes in the team (Avengers 2 could have Iron Man or Captain America with 4 - 6 completely new Avengers (Black PAnther / Captain MArvel / Ms Marvel / She Hulk / Giant Man / War Machine / Power Man) . This gives you a safe "cheap" way to launch new solo movies. Making a Black Panther, Black Widow, Flash, Hawk man (girl) movie at a $150m cost is a big risk when most people have either never heard of them or never really seen them before, but putting them in a sequel guarnateed to make $500m if it stinks and THEN giving them a solo movie if they are popular works just fine. Massive as he was nobody was risking a WOlverine movie 12 years ago, because his popularity was confined to a relatively small group.

      Alert a moderator

    • Ali1748

      Mar 29th 2011, 16:53

      Jon Hamm for Bruce Wayne !

      Alert a moderator

    • KingofSpain

      Mar 29th 2011, 17:43

      Gareth get a grip. I was clearly talking about the current canon of films and frankly just couldn't be a**e typing out the full titles of Nolan's films. Did you then really expect me, in keeping with your rule book, to refer to them as Batmans 6, 7 and 8? Come on. Can't believe you wasted a whole post moaning about that. And now I can't believe how I've wasted a whole post on rebutting your complaint.

      Alert a moderator

    • KingofSpain

      Mar 29th 2011, 17:45

      Ali - Jon Hamm totally deserved the Superman role, Batman would just feel like sloppy seconds to me.

      Alert a moderator

    • GarthMarenghi

      Mar 29th 2011, 20:37

      @KingofSpain - It was a general complaint about that trend, rather than solely for you, hence me referring to it as a 'pet peeve'. Using the films' actual titles or calling it Nolan's 3rd film would surely be fine. There's plenty of pointless c**p on internet messageboards; I don't see why I'm not allowed to spend one minute contributing to it too! You don't have to read it. I think I'll take my own advice from here on out...

      Alert a moderator

    • Ali1748

      Mar 29th 2011, 22:09

      I don't agree with Hamm for Superman, Jon has always struck me as the Bruce Wayne type.

      Alert a moderator

    • Hadouken76

      Mar 30th 2011, 2:14

      dont you just hate it when you write a big essay on the matter and the article is quickly replaced? D'oh!

      Alert a moderator

Most Popular