Are DC films held to a higher Caliber by critics?

[Kahran Ramsus]

So if no one is trying to make a mediocre film, directors are instead 'bunting' to get a full base load for another director to hit a 'grand slam' within the same movieverse? That makes no sense. Directors try to make the best movie they possibly can with what they have to work with. Sometimes they have a ****** bat because that's all the studio game them and that's that. Sometimes directors are just terrible batters and they fail. Every director wants to hit a home run. Not every director can hit a home run. Some first timers get lucky and some pro's swing and miss.

If anyone thinks that Marvel is purposely making easy/formulaic/cheap/cookie cutter lead-in movies so that their team up movies make over a billion dollars is hilariously wrong. Marvel wants everyone of their movies to make over a billion dollars. They all won't because Marvel mitigates risk very well. They know Captain America 2 isn't going to make a billion so they don't sink in $300 million to produce it. The know Avengers 2 will get damn close or exceed that mark again so they will sink in $300 million.

They are trying to make good films, but there is a formula that have pretty well stuck to for all their films, much like EON with the James Bond franchise. Some individual films (Iron Man, Avengers) are more successful than others (Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2), but they don't stray far from the formula and there really isn't that big of a difference between the good ones and the bad ones in terms of quality. As you said, Marvel mitigates risk very well. They aren't likely to blow $300 million on the next Green Lantern. On the downside, that prevents them from being as ambitious as say...Christopher Nolan, at least since their first film was a success and established the brand.

It makes perfect sense. James Bond is by far the longest lasting film franchise in the western world. Why wouldn't you want to emulate EON Productions?

 

[jmc]

The problem is the timing. After Avengers' success, both Sony and Fox have make it clear that they are going to create their own cinematic universes, with the Marvel properties that they have. And WB decided to instead of making a standard sequel of MOS, they are going to have both Batman and Wonder Woman in it, then feign surprise that anyone think they were influenced by Avengers' success.

They can't fool me.

Throughout WB's history they have never attempted a team-up between their marquee superheroes, even during the height of their movies' popularity. And they're doing it merely few years after Avengers made over a billion WW? WB, like Sony and Fox, are just striking while the iron is hot. They knew that this gravy train may not last forever, and eventually GA will be tired of superheroes, like they did with westerns and other genres, and by then it will be too late to make JL. But unlike other studios, they aren't willing to admit it.

Of course it was an influence. But what exactly would you like WB to say? Studios influence each others decisions all the time, it's happened since the silent era. Who gives a flying **** if Avengers was the reason for a Batman/Superman film? Seriously. What, you need WB to come out hands raise and say 'Yep, Avengers was what finally got us to do JL' ? What the hell does that accomplished other than a batch of 'I told you so' comments from the Marvel zombies?

 

[Rocketman]

Marvel Studios is doing it because two of their most well-known properties are at Fox and Sony. It is as if WB had given away the rights of Superman (Spider-Man) and Batman (X-Men), and now must do what they can with the rest of the properties. I'd like to see how WB can do it if they can't rely on Supe and Bat, and still make a franchise that can gross a billion.

They wouldn't. They're Warner Brothers. Not DC. They make MOVIES, not SUPERHERO MOVIES. Until DC creates a movie studio called DC Studios, this means absolutely nothing. If DC Studios existed and WB said, "Okay, you can make DC films, but WB secures the rights to Batman and Superman," it would be pathetic. Just like it is with Marvel.

You're talking about one studio whose sole purpose is to make superhero movies, and right now, they're scraping at the bottom of the barrel because the same studio doesn't have their top characters. WB wouldn't be "stuck" making Teen Titans, or Booster Gold, or Martian Manhunter. They would continue making Inception, The Departed, The Matrix, The Shawshank Redemption, Argo, The Town, etc. Marvel can't do that. They have Ant-Man.

I love how the margin of real success for people here is the amount of money made. By this line of thinking, Spider-Man 3 was an untouchable classic, along with Transformers 2. I think you guys need to take a step back and stop insisting that Marvel is so flawless and amazing, simply because they're cranking out one mediocre movie after another. I'm not impressed.

 

[C. Lee]

Opinions....like snowflakes, no two are alike.

Posters on here will go to great lengths to keep a Marvel vs DC war going.

Posters on here will go to great lengths to keep a DC vs Marvel war going.

It's too bad people can't just hope any comic related movie will do good and be good...they must downgrade "the opposition" and make excuses for anything that doesn't fit their opinion.

I am a comic book fan. I am also a comic book movie fan. I have loved DC movies. I have loved Marvel movies. I have hated DC movies. I have hated Marvel movies. I have loved and hated comic book movies made from comics that were neither Marvel or DC.

I daily have to shake my head and face palm myself when reading how people on here act towards and about a comic book movie they consider "the enemy camp". Really? It's not bad enough that some of you consider a comic book company and it's movies "the enemy"...but you actually spend as much or more time complaining about and attacking them than you do praising and complimenting your side.

It never fails to amaze me that some people...if they hate DC or Marvel...just can't ignore them. That would be best, but no....they have to attack them, belittle them, attack and belittle the fans of them. What's next....starting a petition in your town that Marvel likers must sit at the back of the bus? The people who like DC will now have separate water fountains? Should we now create separate camps for the people who like the company you don't and make them wear a sign designating the comic book company they have faith in?

It's a shame that people can't simply like a movie with a costumed superpowered metahuman in it....it must be the costumed superpowered metahuman from the "right" company.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I don't even consider it Marvel vs. DC when it comes to films. I consider it Disney vs. WB vs. Fox vs. Sony.

There are positives and negatives of all four of those studios, and each one is only as good as their last film. The 'What have you done for me lately?' effect.

 

[Marvin]

The problem is the timing. After Avengers' success, both Sony and Fox have make it clear that they are going to create their own cinematic universes, with the Marvel properties that they have. And WB decided to instead of making a standard sequel of MOS, they are going to have both Batman and Wonder Woman in it, then feign surprise that anyone think they were influenced by Avengers' success.

They can't fool me.

Throughout WB's history they have never attempted a team-up between their marquee superheroes, even during the height of their movies' popularity. And they're doing it merely few years after Avengers made over a billion WW? WB, like Sony and Fox, are just striking while the iron is hot. They knew that this gravy train may not last forever, and eventually GA will be tired of superheroes, like they did with westerns and other genres, and by then it will be too late to make JL. But unlike other studios, they aren't willing to admit it.

what the hell is sony doing in regards to marvel studio?

I heard about them planning spinoff's of their characters and multiple villains...Is that what you are getting at with the mcu shared universe design? I don't see it. Spinoff's and multiple villains have existed long before avengers.

A true example of what you are implying is AvP or freddy vs jason. I don't see that happening at sony. I actually just see spidey 3 on steroids.

 

[Rocketman]

I honestly believe (not to sound like a 5-year-old) that Marvel fanboys have started it and are continuing it. The bullying continuously starts with "DC isn't doing anything", "DC has no plan", "WB doesn't care about Justice League", "Man of Steel is the worst movie ever", "Man of Steel is a terrible jumping-off point for a shared universe," and it's gotten to the point where hearing the same five remarks constructed in different ways is pathetic.

Meanwhile, when someone like me offers a legitimate criticism about how Marvel will be in a more "stuck" position because they don't have the rights to their top characters and are now relying on Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy, the argument then switches to, "Oh yeah? Well at least it'll make a BILLION dollars!! Where's your Wonder Woman movie?", which is again, pathetic.

Just my two cents. I genuinely want good movies as well. I just prefer not hearing about how DC sucks because Green Lantern got made, while ignoring The Dark Knight Trilogy (widely considered the greatest superhero trilogy ever).

 

[chaseter]

I don't even consider it Marvel vs. DC when it comes to films. I consider it Disney vs. WB vs. Fox vs. Sony.

Exactly. It's amazing how WB can handle Harry Potter but they can't handle DC? Disney is the king and will be for a long, long time. Fox is doing better and Sony I think is going for the Hail Mary with Spider-Man. WB to me is at the bottom with their gross mismanagement and lack of any sort of vision other than what they come up with on the fly.

 

[chaseter]

I honestly believe (not to sound like a 5-year-old) that Marvel fanboys have started it and are continuing it. The bullying continuously starts with "DC isn't doing anything", "DC has no plan", "WB doesn't care about Justice League", "Man of Steel is the worst movie ever", "Man of Steel is a terrible jumping-off point for a shared universe," and it's gotten to the point where hearing the same five remarks constructed in different ways is pathetic.

Meanwhile, when someone like me offers a legitimate criticism about how Marvel will be in a more "stuck" position because they don't have the rights to their top characters and are now relying on Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy, the argument then switches to, "Oh yeah? Well at least it'll make a BILLION dollars!! Where's your Wonder Woman movie?", which is again, pathetic.

Just my two cents. I genuinely want good movies as well. I just prefer not hearing about how DC sucks because Green Lantern got made, while ignoring The Dark Knight Trilogy (widely considered the greatest superhero trilogy ever).

Dark Knight trilogy was great...but it's gone now. They are starting from scratch. I think more people would be excited if Bale and Nolan were included in the building of the first ever DC movie verse. It's fine to be pessimistic. Marvel has nothing to prove now. DC is up to bat now and they aren't starting strong.

 

[Rocketman]

Annnnd it only took one post after mine for it to continue, lmao.

 

[Shikamaru]

I don't even consider it Marvel vs. DC when it comes to films. I consider it Disney vs. WB vs. Fox vs. Sony.

That's how I see it as well. However, I consider it Marvel vs. WB vs. Fox vs. Sony instead. Much like Pixar, Marvel Studios hasn't really changed since they were bought by Disney other than the obvious fact that they have more financial backups now.

 

[The Guard]

I don't think it has much to do with standards. I think it has to do with critical bias against certain directors who may have delivered a solid film, but still get raked over the coals by critics and fanboys on some level. This is something Marvel has not, to date, really had to contend with, as far as I can tell.

 

[C. Lee]

I honestly believe (not to sound like a 5-year-old) that Marvel fanboys have started it and are continuing it.

I've been here 13 years and 3 months now, I go into all forums....take it from me...it's people on both sides at fault.

 

[chaseter]

Annnnd it only took one post after mine for it to continue, lmao.

That's what happens in a woe is DC whine thread. Blaming the critics...lol. DC and WB are not the best at their movie verse planning. That's overly apparent. There is no argument.

 

[Rocketman]

Dark Knight trilogy was great...but it's gone now. They are starting from scratch. I think more people would be excited if Bale and Nolan were included in the building of the first ever DC movie verse. It's fine to be pessimistic. Marvel has nothing to prove now. DC is up to bat now and they aren't starting strong.

Well, I'm glad Marvel has nothing to prove in the future with Thor 3, Captain America 3, Ant-Man 2, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, Doctor Strange, Doctor Strange 2... I'm sure Disney will be shocking the world with all the new, fresh material.

 

[chaseter]

Well, I'm glad Marvel has nothing to prove in the future with Thor 3, Captain America 3, Ant-Man 2, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, Doctor Strange, Doctor Strange 2... I'm sure Disney will be shocking the world with all the new, fresh material.

Lol at your hypocrisy.

 

[redhawk23]

Yes.

That movie is no worse than Iron Man 2, Iron Man 3, Thor 2, Spider-Man 3, X-Men 3, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Daredevil, Elektra, Fantastic Four, Fantastic Four 2. If it's not equal to the quality of those films, I'd argue it's microscopically better.

Now, does Marvel have anything on the level of Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises, Man of Steel, Watchmen, or V For Vendetta? I say no... with respectful consideration for The Avengers and Iron Man.

Iron Man 3 is far, far better than green lantern. Iron Man 2 though gets a better reception off of the strength of its cast alone.

Watchmen was about the best that could be mustered out of trying to make a film of Watchmen, but that doesn't mean it is particularly good.

Pre-2008 movies are barely relevant to the conversation. All of those movies, on either side, are of a different time. Plus most of those movies you named are some of the most critically reviled films of the last 10 years so its hardly an argument that critics go easier on them.

Half of Rises is a really good movie....Everything post-spinal crack is a mess.

I find Man of Steel and the Thor films to be mostly on par with one another. Enjoyable, but not really anything I find myself wanting to return to ever.

 

[redhawk23]

The city actually isn't destroyed, superman didn't help to destroy it in the least, and superman didn't slaughter anyone. However the critics will tell you and themselves some grim fiction to justify their contempt.

Throwing people through buildings doesn't count as a contribution?

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Exactly. It's amazing how WB can handle Harry Potter but they can't handle DC? Disney is the king and will be for a long, long time. Fox is doing better and Sony I think is going for the Hail Mary with Spider-Man. WB to me is at the bottom with their gross mismanagement and lack of any sort of vision other than what they come up with on the fly.

I think Sony has the biggest problem. Unlike the others, they don't have a universe. They have a character. No matter how much they would like to believe otherwise.

 

[redhawk23]

See that's just the thing, are universes really necessary?

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

See that's just the thing, are universes really necessary?

If as a studio boss you want a superhero film out every year, they are.

I personally think Sony should take a closer look at what they have and make it the best they can, rather than try and force something that isn't there.

 

[redhawk23]

Yeah, I see what you're saying.

In general though I kind of get sick of shared universes, more or less what ends up driving me away from the Big 2 comics shortly after every reboot attempt.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I am okay with shared universes, but when reading comics I prefer it when it focuses on one character or team with occasional guest appearances in supporting roles. I find it hard to get any momentum going when the book is dragged into a company-wide crossover every six months.

That's shouldn't be an issue on film, I hope.

 

[Raiden]

Of course it was an influence. But what exactly would you like WB to say? Studios influence each others decisions all the time, it's happened since the silent era. Who gives a flying **** if Avengers was the reason for a Batman/Superman film? Seriously. What, you need WB to come out hands raise and say 'Yep, Avengers was what finally got us to do JL' ? What the hell does that accomplished other than a batch of 'I told you so' comments from the Marvel zombies?

My post was to show that putting Batman and Wonder Woman in MOS 2 was an decision influenced by Avengers' success, which other movie studios are also trying to emulate.

They wouldn't. They're Warner Brothers. Not DC. They make MOVIES, not SUPERHERO MOVIES. Until DC creates a movie studio called DC Studios, this means absolutely nothing. If DC Studios existed and WB said, "Okay, you can make DC films, but WB secures the rights to Batman and Superman," it would be pathetic. Just like it is with Marvel.

You're talking about one studio whose sole purpose is to make superhero movies, and right now, they're scraping at the bottom of the barrel because the same studio doesn't have their top characters. WB wouldn't be "stuck" making Teen Titans, or Booster Gold, or Martian Manhunter. They would continue making Inception, The Departed, The Matrix, The Shawshank Redemption, Argo, The Town, etc. Marvel can't do that. They have Ant-Man.

I love how the margin of real success for people here is the amount of money made. By this line of thinking, Spider-Man 3 was an untouchable classic, along with Transformers 2. I think you guys need to take a step back and stop insisting that Marvel is so flawless and amazing, simply because they're cranking out one mediocre movie after another. I'm not impressed.

Yes, we know that DC is owned by the conglomerate known as Warner Bros. so they don't need to make superhero movies if they don't want to, and they don't even need to make any movies besides Batman and Superman because they have the rights of these two top properties, so it is likely they will never to have scrap on the bottom of the barrel and give us an Aquaman movie. But Marvel's sole purpose is to make superhero movies and they are without Spider-Man and X-Men, so of course they'd have to make movies based on lesser-known superheroes like Ant-Man. But they have done it already with Iron Man, Thor, and Capt. America, names that were hardly known by GA only a few years ago, so the situation isn't any different. I just don't understand why you'd defend DC by saying that WB doesn't need to make superhero movies if they don't want to, but fault Marvel for Ant-Man because they do.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Opinions....like snowflakes, no two are alike.

Posters on here will go to great lengths to keep a Marvel vs DC war going.

Posters on here will go to great lengths to keep a DC vs Marvel war going.

It's too bad people can't just hope any comic related movie will do good and be good...they must downgrade "the opposition" and make excuses for anything that doesn't fit their opinion.

I am a comic book fan. I am also a comic book movie fan. I have loved DC movies. I have loved Marvel movies. I have hated DC movies. I have hated Marvel movies. I have loved and hated comic book movies made from comics that were neither Marvel or DC.

I daily have to shake my head and face palm myself when reading how people on here act towards and about a comic book movie they consider "the enemy camp". Really? It's not bad enough that some of you consider a comic book company and it's movies "the enemy"...but you actually spend as much or more time complaining about and attacking them than you do praising and complimenting your side.

It never fails to amaze me that some people...if they hate DC or Marvel...just can't ignore them. That would be best, but no....they have to attack them, belittle them, attack and belittle the fans of them. What's next....starting a petition in your town that Marvel likers must sit at the back of the bus? The people who like DC will now have separate water fountains? Should we now create separate camps for the people who like the company you don't and make them wear a sign designating the comic book company they have faith in?

It's a shame that people can't simply like a movie with a costumed superpowered metahuman in it....it must be the costumed superpowered metahuman from the "right" company.

This. This this this. The GA couldn't care less about Marvel or DC. To them (as a whole) they're all just superhero movie. Period. Some good. Some bad. Some great. Some completely ignored. Doesn't have anything to do with the brand.

As far as critics go, some have a bias for Marvel or DC. Just like some have a bias for a particular studio, director or actor. The best critics don't, but even then, because of the current state of the ent. business some of the most objective have been known to let their baggage creep into their reviews. But it's on a case by case basis. There's no blanket bias.

If "your" go-to critic has a penchant for biased reviews based on personal preference to a brand I recommend ditching them for someone who properly judges a movie for face value. That's my two cents.