Warner pulls plug on 'Justice League'

"Justice League" is no longer moving faster than a speeding bullet.
Warner Bros. let the options lapse on the young cast that director George Miller chose to play DC superhero staples. The studio, which had set Tuesday as its greenlight deadline for the pic, confirmed Wednesday the project is on indefinite hold.

Project now most likely won't get under way until late summer or fall at the earliest.

Cast members were informed late Tuesday their options would not be exercised, but they were also assured the studio is determined to make the film with them in it. But before that can happen, there are several problems to be resolved.

The studio's reasons included not getting the official response it needed on tax breaks from shooting in Australia. And while WB execs like the script they got from Kieran and Michele Mulroney, it would benefit from a little more work, something that isn't possible because of the writers' strike.

Some were surprised the studio didn't exercise cast options anyway. The deals gave WB the flexibility to exercise the deals immediately, or in July, and the actors will be making salaries in the low six-figure range. While Adam Brody, cast as the Flash, has a track record, most of the cast comprises such newcomers as Armie Hammer Jr., who plays Batman, and Megan Gale, who will play Wonder Woman.

The studio risks losing them to other film jobs. But it is likely most if not all the cast will make sure to be available starting late summer and fall, just in case. That's because of the starmaking potential of "Justice League."

Studio had set this week as the deadline to greenlight the superhero tentpole, which it was racing to get into production for 2009 release. That was always considered a dicey proposition, particularly when the writers went on strike, and because the film needs to be completed before the SAG deal expires in June.

With "Justice League" on indefinite hold, the studio has a superhero gap on its 2009 slate; status of the next "Superman" pic is also uncertain.


Here's my official statement:

I read that but couldn't find the JL thread from before. I think WB is saving us from giant levels of suck by doing this though.

The general public isn't sharp enough to handle 2 batmen and 2 supermen running around.

wth!!! on hold damn it


I'm not kidding either

DO we really need another Super Hero Movie? Let alone an Ensemble Super Hero Movie? I have yet to really see a good one. Even the new Batmans and Supermans leave me cold.

I just don't wanna bunch of newcomers...that will suck.

Rhondab said:

i seem to remember a while ago that ppl would be turned off a film like this is it had established stars. now it seems everyone is turned off by the opposite. can't please everyone can we?

what they should do is cast relatively famous ppl like they did Christian Bale for Batman.
[Edited 1/17/08 11:21am]

Milty said:

Mars23 said:

True. WB did us comic fans a favor. This film had disaster written all over it. First of all, you'd need four hours to do JLA right with all those characters. What they should do is start off with Supes, Batman & WW - introduce the rest in sequels.

Rhondab said:

movies are made on teh quality of the script not the size of the stars. a good script with good unknown actors would be better than a bad script with bad superstar actors.

Catwoman anyone?

uPtoWnNY said:

they need a WW movie first.

ehuffnsd said:

oh blah, blah, blah...and still don't want no newcomers

Rhondab said:

I don't mind if they look the role and can act. But I would not have chosen the cast they were thinking of going with.

as much as i love superhero/comic book shit, there's no way this movie would not have sucked, unless perhaps they dosed every moviegoer with acid upon entering the theatre. even then, bad acid trips are a MF.

what was i talking about?

oh yeah. i'm happy this movie isn't being made. does anyone remember the attempted JLA television series? EEEG.

i think if a decent wonder woman film franchise can be established, a film with the "big three" from DC can be attempted, and then they can sneak in a few other big screen superheroes. maybe.

but the idea of doing a JLA movie as a separate thing from the superman and batman franchises is just plain stupid. YAY writers strike!

ehuffnsd said:

true true. for the record, i still haven't seen Catwoman. At the first look atthe costume Halle Berry wore and I was like "uh uh no way".

Anxiety said:

true they need to put WW up there first. I mean, like it's been said, a movie with the Justice League has to be like Lord of the Rings epic, spread over three films not 2 and half hours. well either way i hope it gets to be made in some fashion....just not sucky.

Rhondab said:

This movie will need $100 million for the special effects alone. There won't be any money left in the budget to pay big name actors.

Anxiety said:

A superhero team movie can be done without disastrous results. X2 wasn't terrible I thought.

sextonseven said:

i agree! i have no problem with the idea of a superhero team movie. i just think the way they were going about the JLA movie would have guaranteed a big mess of a flop.

You're lucky. 20th Century Fox is still moving forward with the DragonBall Z movie and it'll be out in August.


THAT will be craptastic

Anxiety said:

Yeah, this JLA film was being rushed.

sextonseven said:

only because the first Xmen was backstory.

the third one was such a let down.

ehuffnsd said:

the third one is my favorite

let go of any hopes for consistency with the comic book continuity, and it's a really gratifying story about a woman gone completely out of control. i didn't want to like it, but i did.

Anxiety said:

My favorite character Cyclops gets killed in the first ten minutes. LAME!

sextonseven said:

yeah. well. when i saw where they were going with this one, i forced myself to detatch from any connection between the movie franchise and the comic book series, and when i did that i was able to have a really good time watching famke whatevsen shred everything in her path for two hours.

Anxiety said:

i just wanted it to be left to Brian Singer.

ehuffnsd said:

brian singer should have been written into the script so jean grey could vaporise him, too.

Anxiety said:

ehuffnsd said:

i didn't mean that in an anti-brian singer kind of way. i meant it in a "she vaporized everything else, she might as well break the third wall and vaporize the filmmakers too".

if i meant it the other way, i'd much rather her burn brett ratner's biscuits first, i don't care if i DID like X3.

Anxiety said:

see the problem with a group superhero film is that it can't be done in just one film or a couple of sequels. it needs to be a trilogy like star wars.

Milty said:

i don't think it has to, though if a group film is successful it seems unlikely that it would be the end of the franchise because you have so many directions and possibilities as opposed to having to milk one character for a bunch of movies (which, lord knows, happens all the time anyway). i like the idea of a big group superhero movie that splinters off into a bunch of spin-off films about individual characters. it would be smart if they spun the existing batman and superman films into such a plan, but for whatever reason it didn't seem like that was the intention.