Also, the reason nobody takes seriously the "first three movies comparison" argument is that its a crappy argument.
1. It ignores budget, looking solely at gross rather than actual profitability
2. Comparing B/C list characters to A list characters is apples and oranges
3. One set is the first three movies produced by a studio, ever, the other are three movies from a studio that has produced a lot more movies *just in those franchises* before
4. Different movies have different expectations, and WB most certainly had vastly different expectations for their films than they got
5. Picking a comparison that *just happens* to include the worst performing movie in the entire orveau smells an awful lot like bad faith
The notion of a crappy argument TOTALLY depends on the context in which it is brought up, which (for the record) was in response to someone claiming the first 3 movies of the MCU made more money than the first 3 of the DCEU. When it was shown this was not the case, then (of course) the often used adjusted figures/budgets and A-list/B-list argument was employed. I'm not positive, but I think you may have been a participant in that thread (Suicide Squad box office). So many of the posts were deleted by moderators, I can't say for sure. Apologies if this is not the case. If you were part of it, though, you should be able to verify what I'm saying is true.
1. Not correct...the analysis I posted (which, as I indicated earlier, was deleted by moderators) made concessions for adjusted numbers (both total gross and budgets) and the A-list/B-list argument. Please keep in mind, this was a 2ND analysis! It was only used after the adjusted figures argument was brought up. As I (and InCali) have always said, the only true OBJECTIVE analysis comes from unadjusted box office numbers. When you look at these figures and include budget, the DCEU's first 3 films are more profitable than the first 3 MCU films. Period. Facts can sometimes be a beyatch and SOME folks have a hard time accepting them (which is why they bring up all the "silly" adjusted numbers arguments).
2. Could not agree more. However, as I have said many times before, it tends to be a fallback argument when things OBJECTIVELY shift in a direction that is not, shall we say, optimal for their side. It is the reason the 2nd set of numbers included 4 movies for the MCU vs 3 movies for the DCEU
3. Again...this was in RESPONSE to an assertion made by a Marvel fan. I was simply pointing out their statement was incorrect. They made the comparison between the MCU and DCEU. None of the previous incarnations (Nolan movies, Reeve's Superman movies, Raimi Spidey movies, X-men movies, etc.) were even considered.
4. For sure. I don't think anyone can argue WB left a lot of money on the table.
5. Again...the parameters of the original assertion was with respect to the first 3 films of the MCU and the first 3 films of the DCEU.
I would love to re-post the numbers here but they would probably just be deleted. In short, with regard to the first 3 movies of each franchise, the OBJECTIVE fact of the matter is DC comes out on top. When you include the 'apples and oranges' factors that were brought up to counter, DC still comes out on top. In the grand scheme of things, does this even matter? Probably not, but again, it was only pointed out as a rebuttal to some incorrect assertions.