The Ghostbusters Cinematic Universe... oh dear

So it turns out that in addition to the female-led Ghostbusters reboot Sony Pictures have greenlit a male-led Ghostbusters film as well as starting a new production company called Ghostcorps to oversee future film, TV and merchandising projects for the franchise. Sony wants to make a shared universe out of this idea because shared universes are the big thing now Marvel-Disney have proved it can makes stacks of cash through mutual marketing and consolidating audiences.

It could work, I'm perfectly open to the idea of this working but I'm dubious. It isn't the Sony thing. Sure, they failed to make the shared universe thing work with The Amazing Spider-Man but those weren't films they wanted to make. They actually seem interested in Ghostbusters so I have somewhat higher hopes.

Rather its that nothing in Ghostbusters screams “shared universe” to me. I'm interested to see how the old “four funny dudes start a business, hilarity ensues plus ghosts” formula works with modern comediennes and I can't deny a straight-up reboot would interest me too but what else is there?

That the shared universe thing works for comicbook movies is obvious, its been part of their native format for over seventy years. The only barrier to doing it in film was getting all the rights under one roof, which only makes it stranger Marvel got there first but that's a rant for another day. Marvel and DC have pre-existing shared universes and literally thousands of discrete intellectual properties under their direct ownership. Even Fox and Sony's third party agreements aren't hurting for spin-off material.

There are certainly properties outside comics that would lend themselves to this approach. Universal tried to revive their old monster movie franchise as a shared universe a few years back. The Expendables movies are really just applying the same logic to the whole 80s action movie genre after the fact instead of building the thing from the ground up. Star Trek could probably afford to diversify a bit more given how much source material there is to work from and Star Wars actually will have stand-alone movies between “proper” Episodes for similar reasons.

Ghostbusters, though? Perhaps appropriately there ain't much meat on them bones. The source material as it stands is made of two movies, a couple of cartoons and various scattered pieces of other media. Each version extends from exactly the same premise with a more or less consistent cast of characters (I'm reasonably sure every version features Egon and Janine).

Of course, new characters are being created for this franchise. If nothing else I imagine feminising the name Egon would be a challenge. The lack of natural alternative angles is more of a problem: the franchise has always taken place in a quasi-realistic world where the only divergence from the viewers' reality is the presence of ghosts and they're not even common enough that people stop being sceptical about their existence. That's the whole point of the original movies: it works exactly like any other comedy about starting a small neighbourhood business except that the business they're starting is the weirdest one imaginable.

I want to be giving the benefit of the doubt here but the state of original thought in big budget movies right now is... not ideal. This is absolutely part of the pattern these days of studios grabbing any famous brand that isn't nailed down. They can't really be blamed for this, its what pays their bills right now and they've lost good money betting on people watching quality original movies, Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World being the unjustifiable flop that most immediately springs to mind.

So, yes, a film that is a genuine pop culture icon gets the reboot and the instant thought now is “franchise” whether or not the source material really supports it. It may do, as I say, I have no insight into this but it seems a very long shot to go shared universe when normally you'd expect them to just announce a trilogy pending box office numbers. On that subject, it might not even happen, the first film is still months away from shooting.

If nothing else this offers and interesting limit case scenario for the whole shared universe concept. 

DC film slate 2016 - 2020 announced

Okay, big thing that happened the other day not involving the clinically mental (then again...) is that Warner Bros. announced the basic shape of their film slate going forward to 2020. There's other stuff on there and they insist further solo Batman and Superman films (and Batman and Superman films?) will also be added to the docket in time but the big news is we finally have a roadmap for the DC Cinematic Universe.

So, what do we have?

Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Franchise we already knew about but the Suicide Squad movie totally crept up on me, don't know about anyone else. Its actually a pretty clever choice for universe-building purposes since a team of villains is by definition a team-up of characters from different franchises. This is especially good since DC has a horrible history of foregrounding bad guys in their films to the detriment of the heroes' development (i.e. every Batman movie since Burton) so sticking a bunch of them in a movie, developing them there and trusting the audience to remember them when, say, Ocean Master turns up in Aquaman might be an interesting solution to this problem.

After that there's Justice League, again as previously announced, but there in bright red is the big one: Wonder Woman and I only have this to say:

Please, DC, don't fuck this up. You are dangerously addicted to caution so please, for the love of God, unlearn the lessons of a lifetime, take a risk and make this movie as mad as it deserves to be! You are in the unique position of having the most established, most recognisable superheroine in existence so let that carry the concept and just make a good film. I do not want to be sitting through another Catwoman three years from now.

Moving on, The Flash and Aquaman. This Flash will not the be the TV Flash, not unnaturally as I imagine synching up the filming schedules for this and his two Justice League appearances would be a nightmare. Aquaman is Jason Momoa and I am very much looking forward to that.

Justice League 2... nothing to really say about that. Shazam I am excited about if for no other reason than Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson is confirmed as Black Adam (I imagine they'll call him Teth Adam for some reason). I just hope they remember to have a sense of humour about the property because I'd love to see a fun DC movie and I really, really don't think you can make a grim, dreary Billy Batson. Oh, wait, they did for the New 52 didn't they?

Then there's a Green Lantern film, most likely a reboot because nine years between films is a bit insurmountable even if Ryan Reynolds would still be interested at that stage. Someone somewhere (The Escapist's Moviebob, I think) floated the idea that the easiest way to distance a new Green Lantern from the failed one would be to go with John Stewart, both visually and in personality. That's pure speculation but it might be an interesting angle and the Justice League cartoon certainly means the character is known, perhaps the most recognisable successor hero in the Justice League stable.

And finally a Cyborg movie. Huh. I think this is going to be DC's Guardians of the Galaxy analogue, just with a little more caution but that's DC movies all over. It isn't that Cyborg is without cache, Teen Titans was a big cartoon and they appear to be using the New 52 make-up of the League with Cyborg taking J'onn's place so he'll be far from unknown to the audience. He's always been a “team” character, though. This isn't to say it can't work, it might even be liberating for the film makers to handle a character whose canon doesn't include any real limits on what he can do on his own. There are no Lois Lanes or Daily Planets here to be included as per spec, they can get really creative here. Part of me worries, though, that this might be on the slate just so all the individual Leaguers get “their” movie rather than as a risky yet creative opportunity.

Time will tell, it usually does.