How come Marvel always gets so lucky????

[Primal Slayer]

Lets compare:

This is one thing that DC needs to realise...they have other charecters that are not Batman and Superman. The great thing about Marvel is that they arent as afraid to put out other superheroes while DC/WB just want Superman and Batman with the occasional minor DC hero.

 

[dnno1]

Arguable. 10 seasons of a television show may very well be more profitable than a bunch of not quite successful franchises. But we don't have the books to really say in that regard.

And, that's really NOT the point of the thread. The whole premise of the thread, that DC has to do something to catch up with Marvel now that Loeb has been named to head up television development is flat out wrong. DC is ahead of Marvel in that department and have been for over 2 decades.

And, more to the point, naming Loeb to that position doesn't mean that anything is going to develop in the immediate future. DC apparently has Blue Beetle in development. Marvel is still putting plans together. Until Marvel actually gets something moving towards a pilot, they're behind DC in that department.

This is true. Although recently, Marvel has had a string of successful films (with Spider-Man, Iron-Man, and X-Men properties) if you look at the history, DC /WB has been there and done that already, and it stands to reason, that they will continue to do so.

 

[Donnie Darko]

Yeah, outside of Blade, Marvel hasn't done anything live action since......the Incredible Hulk. DC on the other hand has been churning out shows for years. From Lois and Clark, to Bird's or Prey, to Smallville, and now Blue Beetle. Now, the big question is of course quality of programing, and with Loeb running things, it's likely not to be much better on either side of the fence.

Let's not forget they also had Superboy and The Flash right before Lois and Clark.

 

[dnno1]

This is one thing that DC needs to realise...they have other charecters that are not Batman and Superman. The great thing about Marvel is that they arent as afraid to put out other superheroes while DC/WB just want Superman and Batman with the occasional minor DC hero.

I think they are exploiting those two characters because they are proven big sellers, where the lesser characters are not (look at what happened to Wonder Woman and The Flash). The next successful franchise outside of Batman and Superman is the Justice League/Super Friends Cartoon Series.

 

[Primal Slayer]

I think they are exploiting those two characters because they are proven big sellers, where the lesser characters are not (look at what happened to Wonder Woman and The Flash). The next successful franchise outside of Batman and Superman is the Justice League/Super Friends Cartoon Series.

Because they have no balls to see if anything besides S/B work. Of course S/B will be big sellers because everyone has been exposed to them, that cant be said about other DC charecter. The only time they actually strayed out of S/B movie and went with another DCU charecter (Catwoman) they massivly screwed it up by creating a whole new charecter and story. And we cant see what happened to WW or Flash because nothing has happened with them yet. WW may have had a DTV animated movie but thats about it. Sure it didnt sell as much as S/B but that shouldnt be expected. It is still has made back its budget and then some and surpassed JL:Frontier. DC is just afraid.

 

[Raiden]

Well, you guys have to keep in mind that part of the success that DC has enjoyed on TV is because they are owned by WB, who has a robust TV & animated division. They have a parent company that not only has the resource to make the shows they want, but were also receptive enough to invest in their DC properties on the tube. Kudos to them, and even as a Marvel fan I definitely am envious of the TV shows like Smallville and animated series like Batman: TAS DC fans get to enjoy over the years. Marvel imo although has had some success with animated shows like X-Men: Evolution and TV shows like Incredible Hulk, has had financial difficulties during the 90's and no central division (since they license it to various companies like WB & Sony) put them behind the 8 ball compared to WB.

Now Marvel is owned by Disney, and I think the promotion of Loeb signal a change of the things to come. It remains to be seen if Disney will make the right decisions for Marvel, and not try to micromanage shows too much since Marvel is the expect when it comes to their superheroes, not Disney. However, with accoladed animated studios that Disney have in 2D animation, and Pixar with their 3D studio that churned out such classics like Toy Story, Wall-E, and Up, Marvel's animation fortunes can be competitive against DC/WB if they play their cards right. As for TV, Disney still owns ABC & ABC Family, as well as Disney XD and a slew of other channels. Marvel can tap into this awesome outlet and develop series that can become as successful as DC's Smallville, but since TV shows are usually driven by a singular vision & creator (like Whedon for Buffy), they will have to bring in a veteran who can understand how to work with Marvel and have the experience to turn a comic series into a legit TV show.

I still see many obstacles ahead for Marvel, despite the promotion of Jeph Loeb and the resources of Disney/Pixar/ABC that they are now part of and can tap into. However, Loeb's interview gives me some hope, since he outlines many of the things that DC had done right, and projects that he believes Marvel should strive for in the future to catch up to their Distinguish Competitor. I do see a silver lining from the interview and as a Marvel fan, I look forward to this new beginning for Marvel Television.

 

[Evil Twin]

And Pixar/Disney kick any WB animation ass infinitely. Marvel is now Disney. Don't say I don't warn you...

This is good in theory and probably long term, but Pixar and Disney Animation have their own irons in the fire, with announced pictures through 2012 and likely plans beyond that.

Also, Marvel doesn't really fit under the general guidelines of Disney or Pixar animation, generally G or PG, all ages fare. Potentially it's a good thing, but it could end up a situation like WB and properties that aren't Batman or Superman, a secondary priority.

 

[Raiden]

This is good in theory and probably long term, but Pixar and Disney Animation have their own irons in the fire, with announced pictures through 2012 and likely plans beyond that.

Also, Marvel doesn't really fit under the general guidelines of Disney or Pixar animation, generally G or PG, all ages fare. Potentially it's a good thing, but it could end up a situation like WB and properties that aren't Batman or Superman, a secondary priority.

Well, although Pixar movies are generally rated G or PG, I don't think it is fair to categorize them as kiddie movies and therefore cannot handle the complexity or maturity of Marvel comics. The Pixar movies I've seen contain many more grown-up themes than even many of the Marvel & DC comics, and they were not made just to target pre-teens and youngsters, either. If Brad Bird (from The Incredibles) decides to make a Marvel movie, I'm sure it'd be better than at least half of the Marvel movies out there, animated or not.

 

[Evil Twin]

Well, although Pixar movies are generally rated G or PG, I don't think it is fair to categorize them as kiddie movies and therefore cannot handle the complexity or maturity of Marvel comics. The Pixar movies I've seen contain many more grown-up themes than even many of the Marvel & DC comics, and they were not made just to target pre-teens and youngsters, either. If Brad Bird (from The Incredibles) decides to make a Marvel movie, I'm sure it'd be better than at least half of the Marvel movies out there, animated or not.

Where did I even remotely imply that Pixar makes non-complex "kiddie movies"?

But, Pixar has a brand and a philosophy (smart, all ages, original) that might not mesh with the idea of adapting Marvel superheroes. Certainly the fanboys complaining about the studios not making R-rated superhero movies, will probably have an apoplexy when a G or PG-rated superhero movie comes out.

Then again, Pixar might be interested, but I think Pixar would have to have serious internal and philosophical discussions first. It very well may be that Pixar and Disney Animation will think Marvel Animation should be a separate arm, although I'm sure they'd be open to offering advice and would recommend people to run it. But, I wouldn't count on John Lasseter overseeing Marvel's animation slate in the near future.

 

[chiefchirpa]

Where did I even remotely imply that Pixar makes non-complex "kiddie movies"?

But, Pixar has a brand and a philosophy (smart, all ages, original) that might not mesh with the idea of adapting Marvel superheroes. Certainly the fanboys complaining about the studios not making R-rated superhero movies, will probably have an apoplexy when a G or PG-rated superhero movie comes out.

Then again, Pixar might be interested, but I think Pixar would have to have serious internal and philosophical discussions first. It very well may be that Pixar and Disney Animation will think Marvel Animation should be a separate arm, although I'm sure they'd be open to offering advice and would recommend people to run it. But, I wouldn't count on John Lasseter overseeing Marvel's animation slate in the near future.

Marvel have Runaways, Powerpack and young heroes like Gravity and Speedball (yeah, no more Penance) - I think those are PG or G materials.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

And Pixar/Disney kick any WB animation ass infinitely. Marvel is now Disney. Don't say I don't warn you...

But they haven't made any. As of right now DC animation beats Marvel easily.

Batman: Mask Of The Phantasm kicks the crap out of any animated movie ever. t:

 

[chiefchirpa]

^ If you're a superhero nuts, maybe. But me and most average joes think most Pixar stuff beat BMOTP handily.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

Other than the Toy Story movies I haven't seen any Pixar stuff. They don't interest me at all. I like the classic early 90's Disney movies. The Lion King is briliant, imo.

You're right. In terms of animated superhero movies, the consensus seems to be that Mask Of The Phantasm is the best.

It's a moot point, anyway. Pixar/Disney haven't made any Marvel movies yet, which is what we're talking about.

 

[BlueLightning]

Other than the Toy Story movies I haven't seen any Pixar stuff. They don't interest me at all. I like the classic early 90's Disney movies. The Lion King is briliant, imo.

You're right. In terms of animated superhero movies, the consensus seems to be that Mask Of The Phantasm is the best.

It's a moot point, anyway. Pixar/Disney haven't made any Marvel movies yet, which is what we're talking about.

You absolutely NEED to watch some Pixar movies. You are missing big time. Talking about superhero movies, watch The Incredibles, then you will understand why some people want a Marvel/Pixar movie (Personally, I don't want to, Pixar is doing excelent with their original movies.)

 

[REDophile]

DC has done more than Marvel on TV and animated features for a long time, but Marvel is way ahead in live action films.
If GL is a hit next year, that may start to change. Yes, DC has the disadvantage because Warners is the only studio they can work with, but one of these days they will see the need to usher in more DC superheroes besides Superman and Batman on the silver screen.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

You absolutely NEED to watch some Pixar movies. You are missing big time. Talking about superhero movies, watch The Incredibles, then you will understand why some people want a Marvel/Pixar movie (Personally, I don't want to, Pixar is doing excelent with their original movies.)

I have. I got Pixar mixed up with Dreamworks. I actually watched Ratatouille 2 nights ago.

I hate it when people tell me I 'need' to watch certain movies. I'll watch what I want to watch. If I'm not interested in something I'm not going to waste my time with it.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Seriously, on top of all the other success Marvel has found and all the things they have been able to achieve, now they get Jeph Loeb as there new top executive. And whats he talking about, live action television, something I have wanted DC to look into for awhile.

Loeb is a smart, creative guy that will help Marvel find even more success. And the damning thing is that DC had all the time in the world to make him there top guy. I don't know why Jeph Loeb, who has had success in comics and television/filmed work didn't get named the head of DC Entertainment.

Lucky???

DCs been kicking Marvel's ass when it comes to DTV movies, animated series and live action series.

 

[dnno1]

Because they have no balls to see if anything besides S/B work. Of course S/B will be big sellers because everyone has been exposed to them, that cant be said about other DC charecter. The only time they actually strayed out of S/B movie and went with another DCU charecter (Catwoman) they massivly screwed it up by creating a whole new charecter and story. And we cant see what happened to WW or Flash because nothing has happened with them yet. WW may have had a DTV animated movie but thats about it. Sure it didnt sell as much as S/B but that shouldnt be expected. It is still has made back its budget and then some and surpassed JL:Frontier. DC is just afraid.

No, it's because they got the message. "If it has a cape, it flies." Hopefully when "Green Lantern" is released they will modify that statement to "If it has a cape or a ring, it flies."

 

[Heretic]

Remember folks...anything that DC does simply does not count. Marvel is the one making all the movies and tv shows...and any tv shows or movies that DC makes are not valid in the discussion for some bizarre reason that I can't figure out.

Human Target and Smallville are both on network tv...but Marvel is the hot tv production company???

 

[The Batman]

Seriously, the stupidity DC fans have is astounding.

BTW: Why cant DC lowball and lose actors like Marvel does!?!?! They cant do anything right!

 

[Doc Ock]

Lucky???

DCs been kicking Marvel's ass when it comes to DTV movies, animated series and live action series.

I agree completely! The DCAU, DCU films, and Smallville are just so much much better than Marvel's current TV department. Although I think overall Marvel has had better theatrical films than DC, thats primarily because Marvel has had a larger amount of films than DC in recent years. But with Green Lantern, and hopefully Wonder Woman, The Flash and another Superman and others on the way that will balance. I'm a fan of both Marvel and DC, and I don't consider Marvel lucky...just different than DC and Warner Bros.

 

[Webley]

One thing Marvel is doing better than DC is in live action for the most part thay give there superheros the same costume thay have in the comics.

 

[super85]

I don't really agee with you on that Webley, I think the Marvel adaptations have just as much changes in costumes as the DC films have.

 

[Doc Ock]

I don't really agee with you on that Webley, I think the Marvel adaptations have just as much changes in costumes as the DC films have.

Agreed! Look at the X-Men films!

 

[hippie_hunter]

This is good in theory and probably long term, but Pixar and Disney Animation have their own irons in the fire, with announced pictures through 2012 and likely plans beyond that.

Also, Marvel doesn't really fit under the general guidelines of Disney or Pixar animation, generally G or PG, all ages fare. Potentially it's a good thing, but it could end up a situation like WB and properties that aren't Batman or Superman, a secondary priority.

Actually Disney has the Touchstone Pictures brand for most pictures that are PG-13 (though they have been relying less and less on it) and the Walt Disney Pictures brand has been releasing a few PG-13 releases as well with Pirates of the Caribbean and Prince of Persia.

They plan on releasing future Marvel films such as Dr. Strange and sequels to Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, and the Avengers once the distribution deal with Paramount expires under the Walt Disney Pictures banner.