Are Matt Fraction and Geoff Johns Planning a Green Lantern/Iron Man Crossover?

[Saber Alter]

On Twitter yesterday, Matt Fraction (mattfraction) was talking about the upcoming return of The Mandarin in Invincible Iron Man, the DC and Green Lantern writer Geoff Johns (geoffjohns0) had a sudden idea...







And it was at this point that the two writers started sharing story ideas! Here are some of the main highlights:
































And there you have it - an actual story idea was born! Marvel and DC havent done a crossover in a long time but with Iron Man's movies proving a hit with comic book fans and critics alike and Green Lantern making his big screen debut next year, now would be the perfect time for the two companies to team both the characters and two of their best writers up!

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/joshw24/news/?a=18926

[Alexziq]

Sounds like they were just playing around. Relations between the companies are pretty null. Can't see Disney owned Marvel, and WB owned DC collaborating on a movie. Comic book wise it might happen someday. JLA/Avengers had lasting effects on the DCU so who knows.

[.Batzarro.]

I think they were talking about a comic and not a movie. Sounds pretty good IMO with everything that was being mentioned.

[Yun0]

Sounds like they were just playing around. Relations between the companies are pretty null. Can't see Disney owned Marvel, and WB owned DC collaborating on a movie. Comic book wise it might happen someday. JLA/Avengers had lasting effects on the DCU so who knows.

do you remember a movie named "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?"... Disney/WB can create something together again...

[Danoartist]

   I would stick with the conflict of interest theory. I agree, I don't think with all the red tape involved especially now, that there would be too many crossovers. I don't think the DC VS Marvel/Amalgam or the Avengers/JLA crossover was a great success for either company. I do remember seeing an interview where Joe Quesada was talking about how the companies had just done the DC VS Marvel/Amalgam thing as a marketing ploy, he didn't seem to think it had been a good idea and it didn't garner the results they expected. I think in the same interview he was talking about how Marvel should just focus on their own library. I think the interview had been post-Avengers/JLA but definitely pre-Disney so maybe there are higher powers than him that can make a decision like that.

   The Roger Rabbit comment isn't a very good example, I don't think WB was happy with the turn out because Disney ended up with the character in the end. I do think that there is a story that goes with that and it probably has something to do with them going to court.

   Though if I remember correctly there had been a Hulk/Superman crossover since Amalgam so I suppose if the right creators, pitched an idea in the right way, to the right people, on the right day of the week, who knows what'll happen.

[Alexziq]

do you remember a movie named "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?"... Disney/WB can create something together again...

Totally differant situation, and that was b4 DC, and Marvel belonged to either one. There has been 20 years of history since then. Last time asked Joe Q said Marvel has no plans to collaborate with DC, and that Marvel is doing their own thing.

Getting a comic collaboration together right now is like pulling teeth, let alone a movie.
Post Merge: September 06, 2010, 04:57:28 PM

   I would stick with the conflict of interest theory. I agree, I don't think with all the red tape involved especially now, that there would be too many crossovers. I don't think the DC VS Marvel/Amalgam or the Avengers/JLA crossover was a great success for either company. I do remember seeing an interview where Joe Quesada was talking about how the companies had just done the DC VS Marvel/Amalgam thing as a marketing ploy, he didn't seem to think it had been a good idea and it didn't garner the results they expected. I think in the same interview he was talking about how Marvel should just focus on their own library. I think the interview had been post-Avengers/JLA but definitely pre-Disney so maybe there are higher powers than him that can make a decision like that.

   The Roger Rabbit comment isn't a very good example, I don't think WB was happy with the turn out because Disney ended up with the character in the end. I do think that there is a story that goes with that and it probably has something to do with them going to court.

   Though if I remember correctly there had been a Hulk/Superman crossover since Amalgam so I suppose if the right creators, pitched an idea in the right way, to the right people, on the right day of the week, who knows what'll happen.

You cant really compare JLA/Avengers to Amalgam, or DC vs Marvel. JLA Avengers was many years after the DCvsMarvel crapfest, it's considered modern era, and part of DC continuity. It was done by Busiek that had strong ties to both copanies, and was impartial.

It was pretty successful, but did cause some tension which resulted in the 2 companies keeping their distance. I am sure Johns, and fraction are just trying to get the wheels turning in motion again.

[Danoartist]

   I disagree, you certainly can compare the two projects. Regardless of the creators or the impact of the story on continuity, it was still a collaboration on behalf of the companies and that is the point being debated. Plus, you may think of it as a success, I had read articles that positioned it as a let down. People had been waiting for a Justice League/Avengers Crossover for twenty years and by the time they got the chance to do it, neither company was in the position for over-all preparation to do what the fans wanted to see.
   I don't know what kind of tension was created by Avengers/JLA but I do know that there was more of that should be considered tension during DC VS Marvel. For instance, even though it was a fan polled event, DC said they wouldn't do it if Superman and Batman got beat, no matter what the polls turned out. Which once I found that out really explained to me how Batman beat Captain America in what I thought was a poorly presented fight.
   As for whatever you think of as "modern-era", I know the companies seem to have most of there stuff together now but actually DC had claimed that the outcome of Crisis on Infinite Earths was the modern era for the up until their Infinite or Final Crisis or whatever they think corrected/"ret-coned" things. And Marvel has always been Modern up until the Heroes Re-Born stuff or Ultimate which is totally different, they still use continuity references that stretch all the way back to the sixties.

[Yun0]

   The Roger Rabbit comment isn't a very good example, I don't think WB was happy with the turn out because Disney ended up with the character in the end. I do think that there is a story that goes with that and it probably has something to do with them going to court.

Roger Rabit it's a good example, first of all, YES Roger belongs to Disney and they where planing to do a sequel who's plot was that Roger was in search of his lost father: Bugs Bunny. the proyect didn't realize not because a fight between Disney/WB (cuz there wasn't all the companies in the movie, remeber Betty Boop, Droopy Dog, Yankee Doddle) it was cuz Spielberg didn't want to make fun of nazis cuz of Schindler's List. (due to the RR movie was set in 1941)

Totally differant situation, and that was b4 DC, and Marvel belonged to either one. There has been 20 years of history since then. Last time asked Joe Q said Marvel has no plans to collaborate with DC, and that Marvel is doing their own thing.

guess what? Rger Rabit 2 is planed to release 2012... so yes, 20 years and Disney/WB will work together again...

i'm not saying ironman/green lantern its a good idea... i think it's odd... my point is that disney and wb worked together, can work together and they will work together again

[Alexziq]

  I disagree, you certainly can compare the two projects. Regardless of the creators or the impact of the story on continuity, it was still a collaboration on behalf of the companies and that is the point being debated. Plus, you may think of it as a success, I had read articles that positioned it as a let down. People had been waiting for a Justice League/Avengers Crossover for twenty years and by the time they got the chance to do it, neither company was in the position for over-all preparation to do what the fans wanted to see.
   I don't know what kind of tension was created by Avengers/JLA but I do know that there was more of that should be considered tension during DC VS Marvel. For instance, even though it was a fan polled event, DC said they wouldn't do it if Superman and Batman got beat, no matter what the polls turned out. Which once I found that out really explained to me how Batman beat Captain America in what I thought was a poorly presented fight.
   As for whatever you think of as "modern-era", I know the companies seem to have most of there stuff together now but actually DC had claimed that the outcome of Crisis on Infinite Earths was the modern era for the up until their Infinite or Final Crisis or whatever they think corrected/"ret-coned" things. And Marvel has always been Modern up until the Heroes Re-Born stuff or Ultimate which is totally different, they still use continuity references that stretch all the way back to the sixties.

you love to argue with me, but youre way off on this. If JLA/Avengers was a disappointment is was by typical crybaby azz fan boys griping. The 1st issue sold 200,000 copies. No book sells near that anymore. Not sure where you got your facts from, but it was a huge success, and most professional reviews were good. I dont pay attention to internet fan reviews because they gripe about everything. Busiek is one of the best, and George Perez was the only guy for that job.

Sorry it's not comparable to that DCvM garbage that allowed Wolverlame to defeat Lobo because Marvel was the more kid friendly profitable company in terms of "popularity". JLA/Avengers was a class act project. To lump it in with Amalgam, or DCvM makes it sound like it's part of that, and it definately was not.

When I say modern era, I mean 2000's. Post Crisis on Infinite Earths continuity is mostly long gone. Post IC incorporated most post 2000 continuity with select stories going back to the 60's as well. JLA/Avengers is definately a part of current DC continuity since the Cosmic Egg went on to become the New Earth 1 in the re-imagined DC Multiverse. It had permanent repercusions.

The reason why it raised tensions is exclusive long term contracts started getting signed, and these projects opened the doors for people at both companies to work together, and jump ship. It was almost like a sports free agency type thing. In my opinion DC came out on top, and Marvel didnt like it. Thats a theory, but it the contracts are a huge part of the tension

[Danoartist]

   I don't like arguing, it seems I have as much conviction as you when it comes to comics. You and I just see things differently, that's OK too.
   I was just disagreeing becauase any time the companies decided to crossover it is essentially a big money ploy and I lump them all thogether. I read both major crossovers in question and felt let down or cheated. I dont go on many forums or read many reveiws on the internet I go from what Ihad read in magazines and hear from others first hand.
   I find it funny because to me things you mention in your comments tend to reinforce things I already said, like neither company was prepared to do JLA/Avengers, they had cotracts out on specific characters. My point is why do a project so many look forward to if you can'r do it right? It seems there never will be a time one company or the other will give 100% freedom to any creators so the fans get let down everytime.