Marvel's losing its edge and DC's getting its back

[CConn]

Episode I still didn't beat the original.

 

[Weadazoid]

true, though I must admitt ROTS could top em both considering this is why everyone went to episode 1, and were disapointed by a badly cast child actor.

 

[redlion2]

I believe I already addressed this...X3, Punisher 2, and Hulk 2 are sequels. Sequels almost never do as well as their predecessors. I do however think SM3 will be the exception, that will do very well. Probably arond BB/SR's numbers (aka, it will beat both WW and Flash). As for Iron Man and Submariner...that's simple; Flash and WW are much more well known than both of those properties. Everyone from 9-90 knows who Wonder Woman. You can't say the same about Submariner.

Fair enough. I should mention, I didn't mean DC has the best characters overall...I meant it in terms of the upcoming movies (IE WW > Punisher, etc). But in anycase, do agree that larger properties will beat smaller ones? Like, a Spider-Man movie would beat the crap out of a Dr. Midnite movie every day of the week, right?

I'll address both of these comments in one post because it basically deals with the same subject.. character popularity and how it relates to audience participation. I'll agree with your premise only up to a point. You would probably be right in most cases concerning your assumption that more popular characters will do better than obscure ones as far as films go but this is not always the case.

A glaring example would be Spider-man. Prior to Spider-man being released only the most diehard Spidey fan would've debated that Spidey could beat both Batman and Superman (which are both so-called more popular) as far as critics, fan approval and mainly box office numbers go, yet Spidey trounced both of them soundly. The same thing could happen with the upcoming BB and FF films. It's not impossible.

This is my point. As far as comics go, yeah Flash, WW and Green Lantern might be more popular than SS, Thor, Ironman, Ghost Rider and Sub-mariner but because these properties are making a transition to an altogether different medium, such as film in which they have to appeal to a broader audience, print popularity might not be an advantage for them. If for example, Green Lantern is a good movie and Thor is a better movie, I would fully expect Thor to perform better despite GL's so-called greater comic appeal. IMO.

In other words, I'm willing to compromise with your original point and that is... Marvel COULD be in trouble if those films you mentioned do well but at the same time there's a strong possibility Marvel could hold on to it's #1 spot even if those movies are released. I'm just pointing out the alternative.

As I've stated earlier, there's not enough evidence as of now to claim Marvel is losing it's edge and D.C. is getting their's back. Marvel's latest outings haven't been the best, Blade:Trinity and Elektra, but neither has D.C.'s LOEG and Catwoman. Add to that Constantine's $71,465,000 domestic b.o., offset by it's 100 mil. production cost vs. Blade with it's 70,087,718 domestic b.o. offset by it's 50 mil. production cost, one would still have to concede there's not enough proof to say D.C. is taking Marvel's #1 spot.

I only used those two franchises as examples because D.C. fans like to point out Constantine as the beginning of D.C.'s come back and Blade was Marvel's. I'm not debating the quality of those movies because that's too subjective.

 

[CConn]

Personally, I think DC has a bit better chance of making a come back than you do, but you basically got my point.

 

[Chris Wallace]

But they'll all have their own feature films by the time a JLA movie would be made. Again, how is that vastly different from the comics?

In theory.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I don't think a JLA movie could be done at a price that would be worth it. That would be a huge project, and cost a lot. Forget screen time, concentrate on the money.

I chose not to bring that up. Getting Bale & Routh to suit up for a movie which doesn't focus on their respective characters is a costly proposition in itself.

 

[redlion2]

Personally, I think DC has a bit better chance of making a come back than you do, but you basically got my point.

I understand where you're comin' from so it's all good

 

[Red Mask]

We are many years away from ever getting a JLA movie.

 

[Obsidian]

O.K. here we go again.



Marvel have control about his characters,Dc do´nt.Marvel have good ideas about searching people who can do a great comicbook movie,Dc don´t,only thing about Dc is steal Marvel´s talent for his characters,examples;

X-Men Director Bryan Singer for Superman.
Blade Director & screen writer David Goyer for Batman.
X-Men Actress Halle Berry for Catwoman.
X-Men Producer Lauren Shuler Donner for Neo Constantine.
X-Men Writer Joss Whedon for Wonder Woman.

You act as if these people are bound to Marvel and can't expand their horizons to other companies! Is there some unwritten rule that people can't make other comic book movies that happen to be owned by a different company?! DC did not steal talent. The talent came to DC. They VOLUNTARILY took part in DC films. Oh damn, since Matthew Vaughn's making X-Men 3, he is officially barred from making a DC movie!

 

[Red Mask]

Wait a minute - don't we mean Warner Bros. when we talk about DC? And the Marvel titles are spread throughout different companies.

 

[Obsidian]

Yeah

 

[CConn]

So wait...that means if Bats and Co. all do well, it's a given WB beats all the Marvel's movie companies...since they're divided.

Huh.

 

[redlion2]

and theres garauntee that the upcoming marvel flicks will be good?

There's no garauntee with either company and that's not what I was saying but what I'm implying is that even if D.C.'s major properties are released, they still might not be enough for D.C. to dethrone Marvel with all of it's upcoming releases.

 

[Chris Wallace]

So wait...that means if Bats and Co. all do well, it's a given WB beats all the Marvel's movie companies...since they're divided.

Huh.

Beats them how? There isn't a contest!

 

[Excel]

obviously right now dc has an edge because marvel has released 80% of their hero movies while dc has relesed none.

heres why dc has an advantage RIGHT NOW-

while marvel seems to be simultaneously releasing smaller comic book heros, while having one huge franchise in spiderman, dc is set two have two huge franchies-batman and superman-going at the same time. plus, wonder woman and the flash are in the works, adding to their smaller films. marvel tried to have two in hulk as the second, but they failed. Batman looks to be huge and superman is a gaurenteed mega hit. Marvel has another xmen/average sized franchise going with the fantastic four, and if marvel ****s that up too, their in serious trouble, as dunst is gone after spidey 3, not to mention two new hers in batman and superman, may over take him as the raining cinema comic book champion.

But honestly, who cares? For nearly twenty years 1978-1997 dc OWNED anything that tried to cross its path movies wise. with two franchiens and adjusted inflation, the eight movies they had woulda made them over 3.5 billion. so now 2000-2004 marvel wins win. they put out about 8 movies and total about 2 billion, 1.5. of it coming from two movies alone. ok. dc has a much better history MONEY WISE and they look taking the lead quality wise(lets face it-fox rushed fantastic four, cast and shot august and released 11 months later, ditto x3) because batman begins had been filming for four months before fantastic fours roles were even cast. same for superman and x3. dc is now putting a lot more time into their films, something they didnt used to do, and marvel did. now theyve switched. and as th past has shown, the franchise that puts time into their films like dc did with superman, superman 2, batman, and marvel did with xmen, x2, and spiderman, you get the most money. and dc is putting the most time in right now. Batman Begins should make them atleats even, as it looks like it could be three huge things (a. best comic book movie b)a classic c) a huge mega hit). i think theyll get even no matter how good or how well the fantasic does, just because batman is much more important.

 

[CConn]

Beats them how? There isn't a contest!

Beats them in profits, I mean. And yes, there is a contest when it comes to the studios; they all want to make more than the other. But it was just an aside, anyway, since it doesn't have anything to do really with either DC or Marvel.

 

[roach]

Episode I still didn't beat the original.

It would have if The original trilogy didnt get re released

 

[Red Mask]

obviously right now dc has an edge because marvel has released 80% of their hero movies while dc has relesed none.

heres why dc has an advantage RIGHT NOW-

No - it's Warner Bros., not DC. Remember who is the MASTER and who is the *****. DC is the *****.

 

[redlion2]

while marvel seems to be simultaneously releasing smaller comic book heros, while having one huge franchise in spiderman, dc is set two have two huge franchies-batman and superman-going at the same time. plus, wonder woman and the flash are in the works, adding to their smaller films. marvel tried to have two in hulk as the second, but they failed. Batman looks to be huge and superman is a gaurenteed mega hit. Marvel has another xmen/average sized franchise going with the fantastic four, and if marvel ****s that up too, their in serious trouble, as dunst is gone after spidey 3, not to mention two new hers in batman and superman, may over take him as the raining cinema comic book champion.

First off, you're making a lot of assumptions. We know Warner/D.C. are planning for Batman and Superman to be huge but there's no garauntee. These films have to appeal to a broader audience than just the comics crowd in order to be a financial success. What if Batman fails to excite the general audience? WB/D.C. is under more pressure to deliver than Marvel. If FF fails, Marvel still has Spider-man3 and X-men3, two proven franchises, if BB fail..how much more trouble is WB/D.C in? The jury is still out on Supes, there's a lot of variables still up in the air to prematurely claim Supes is a mega-hit. If WB/D.C.'s two top dawgs fail to impress, you can kiss WW and Flash goodbye. IMO.

But honestly, who cares? For nearly twenty years 1978-1997 dc OWNED anything that tried to cross its path movies wise. with two franchiens and adjusted inflation, the eight movies they had woulda made them over 3.5 billion.

WB/D.C. was the only kid on the block back then, that's no longer the case. Overall, Marvel has parleyed three successful franchises: Blade, X-men and Spider-man.

dc has a much better history MONEY WISE and they look taking the lead quality wise(lets face it-fox rushed fantastic four, cast and shot august and released 11 months later, ditto x3) because batman begins had been filming for four months before fantastic fours roles were even cast.

That's irrelevant. The fact that BB had longer filming time or a larger budget doesn't automatically make it a better movie.

Batman Begins should make them atleats even, as it looks like it could be three huge things (a. best comic book movie b)a classic c) a huge mega hit). i think theyll get even no matter how good or how well the fantasic does, just because batman is much more important.

Hey man, I like your enthusiasm but if FF is better IMO and more financially successful....Marvel still holds on to it's #1 spot.

 

[CConn]

It would have if The original trilogy didnt get re released

And thank God it did.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Very good points and observations, RedLion2.

 

[brainchild81]

Batman might do near-Spider-Man type numbers. I just don't see people lined up outside to see WW, Aquaman or, Supes. They all seem kind of vanilla. I hope all the movies are good and do well, no matter what company. That way, the consumers win. More importantly, no matter who makes better movies or makes more money, I don't care because none of it is going to my favorite charity, the brainchild81 pocket fund.

 

[The Sage]

Batman might do near-Spider-Man type numbers. I just don't see people lined up outside to see WW, Aquaman or, Supes. They all seem kind of vanilla. I hope all the movies are good and do well, no matter what company. That way, the consumers win. More importantly, no matter who makes better movies or makes more money, I don't care because none of it is going to my favorite charity, the brainchild81 pocket fund.

I think your disdain for Superman is preventing from seeing that a Superman movie done very well would pull in a helluva lot of money, Spider-Man numbers possibly.

 

[CConn]

Batman might do near-Spider-Man type numbers. I just don't see people lined up outside to see WW, Aquaman or, Supes.

You could be right about Aquaman...maybe WW (though you're dead wrong about Supes, IMO). But on the other side, who's going to be lined up to see Thor and Sub-Mariner?

 

[redlion2]

You could be right about Aquaman...maybe WW (though you're dead wrong about Supes, IMO). But on the other side, who's going to be lined up to see Thor and Sub-Mariner?

I certainly would

It all comes down to the marketing.