BvS Is anyone else not excited about Superman and Batman? I feel nothing but dread. - Part 2

[regwec]

Even if MOS did a billion, they still would have gone to Batman/Superman or Justice League because The Avengers showed that team-ups have higher earnings potential.

Yep. In fact, I applaud WB for at least taking a short-cut, rather than pumping out endless boring "solo" movies to "establish" the relevant characters.

This approach seems more logical to me. If the audience gets a taste of Aquamoa in a JL movie, and they like it, the "solo" movie can follow. If they don't, well, there are more goodies in the bag.

 

[hafizbat]

Solo movies don't have to be boring...and I'd contest the notion that solo movies only exist for the sake of establishing characters for the team-ups. I'd say the solos are the real meat of the superhero genre, while team-ups are more like big events/crossovers.

 

[The Endless]

They are if they are Marvel, apparently.

 

[zryson]

Solo movies don't have to be boring...and I'd contest the notion that solo movies only exist for the sake of establishing characters for the team-ups. I'd say the solos are the real meat of the superhero genre, while team-ups are more like big events/crossovers.

Exactly. Warner Bros is just rushing ahead to try and catch up to other studios with Batman v Superman. But successes like The Avengers dont happen overnight. And they should know that.

 

[Naked Shia]

they are not rushing. They are trying something different. And it's all for the better. I would rather see a JL movie soon, that endure something like Thor, Thor 2 or Iron Man 2.

 

[hafizbat]

And miss out on things like Iron Man 1 or The Winter Soldier?

 

[Naked Shia]

Iron Man 1 was fun, but nothing special. I haven't seen the winter soldier. But making a team movie doesn't prevent them from making solo movies later. Or team-up movies.

 

[dnno1]

Solo movies don't have to be boring...and I'd contest the notion that solo movies only exist for the sake of establishing characters for the team-ups. I'd say the solos are the real meat of the superhero genre, while team-ups are more like big events/crossovers.

How do you explain The Fantastic Four, The Watchmen, and the X-Men? Not all team/team-ups are necessarily crossovers or meant for big events.

 

[Lencho01]

Pretty sure he was taking about characters, who are for the most part, solo.

 

[Naked Shia]

yeah, but with a good writer, even solo movies can give time for character development.

 

[The Endless]

Yea you don't have solo Fantastic Four or X-Men stories. You can't really compare them to Justice League or Avengers.

No X-Men characters apart from Wolverine can even support a solo comic, let alone a solo film.

 

[hafizbat]

How do you explain The Fantastic Four, The Watchmen, and the X-Men? Not all team/team-ups are necessarily crossovers or meant for big events.

I'd think it's obvious that I'm not speaking of actual full-time teams such as the ones you mentioned, but rather solo superheroes who join up, namely the Avengers or the Justice League.

 

[regwec]

Exactly. Warner Bros is just rushing ahead to try and catch up to other studios with Batman v Superman. But successes like The Avengers dont happen overnight. And they should know that.

There's no evidence to suggest that Marvel's approach is the only one that works.

in any case, if WB did exactly as Marvel had done, you would be whining that WB is merely copying Marvel. Since it is not aping Marvel's every move, you are whining that WB is not copying Marvel.

It's fanboyism at its worst.

 

[Naked Shia]

Actually, the torch seems to be going solo often when you see him teaming up with spidey for instance. And The thing is kinda a loner.

 

[hafizbat]

I always thought the Fantastic Four were pretty lame, to be quite honest. The movies didn't do much to change my opinion.

 

[Naked Shia]

I liked the kirby/lee era. And what they did when Mr Fantastic was supposedly dead. I haven't read that much apart from that. I'm not too fond of Sue and Reed. But like Johnny and Ben's banter.

 

[The Endless]

I'm not a huge fan of the F4 themselves, but i love their mythos and some of their stories have been wacky and imaginative. They are like cosmic adventurers and you've got a nice blend of characters. The family aspect is also great. The Incredibles nailed that more than the actual F4 films unfortunately.

Plus with the F4 you get the likes of Dr Doom, Galactus and his Heralds and all sorts of weird cosmic goodness. It's a shame Marvel don't have the rights.

 

[hafizbat]

Dr. Doom is one of my absolute favorite Marvel villains, so I guess I have the FF to thank for that. But I prefer him as a general Marvel universe villain, rather than just as the archenemy of the FF.

 

[WBwins]

I agree BVS is a great way to set up the DC movie verse as soon as possible.But it has to be really good to work well.
I also hope to see the real MOS 2 released in future

 

[The Endless]

Dr. Doom is one of my absolute favorite Marvel villains, so I guess I have the FF to thank for that. But I prefer him as a general Marvel universe villain, rather than just as the archenemy of the FF.

Oh for sure. He's way to big to just be a villain for one character/one group of characters.

 

[dnno1]

I'd think it's obvious that I'm not speaking of actual full-time teams such as the ones you mentioned, but rather solo superheroes who join up, namely the Avengers or the Justice League.

Pretty sure he was taking about characters, who are for the most part, solo.

No, it's not obvious by the way you wrote that. I still contend that team-ups don't have to be for crossovers or big events. Batman and Robin or Green Arrow and Black Canary are popular team-ups, but yet we didn't need a special event or a crossover to have that happen (nor did we need a solo franchise for either Robin or Black Canary). Thats because there are no set rules on how to tell comic book superhero tales. In actuality it should be driven by perceived or existing popularity, and that would not necessate the creation of a solo franchise independent of the others, which is kind of a costly way to do things, prior to creating a team up. Why do that (create a solo franchise) when virtually no one is interested in it? "Green Lantern is a perfect example of that.

 

[The Batman]

No one was interested in solo GL because the film sucked.

 

[AnneFan]

No one was interested in solo GL because the film sucked.

Hard.

 

[Travesty]

...but what about a solo Green Lantern?

 

[matt47]

They are if they are Marvel, apparently.

Yeah the only Marvel Solo movies I really enjoy watching are; Ion Man 1 (minus the last maybe half hour...), Iron Man 3, I know most hate it but I never read the comics or anything so the Mandarin twist didn't bother me and actually had me laughing my asss off in the theatre and Cap 2. Cap 1 was soooooooooo boring with terrible CGI and the Thor movies have some funny moments but nothing else.