Chris Wallace said:
This statement makes no sense.
Gotta love this board sometimes.
Another raw debate.. very well. Seems to be an interesting past time on the board....
will be edited soon.
EDIT:
Chris Wallace said:
They make movies for the general moveigoing public. To make money. And until a DC/WB movie pulls down more money than Marvel's big moneymakers, all of these arguments are moot. There is no war & if there were, Marvel would be in the lead simply because they're putting more @$$es in seats, regardless of the individual opinions of a few anonymous people on the internet.
Ah yes. The money argument. Its not like i actually never heard of the other side of the argument to make a pov. Thats exactly how I do it lol There have been people to argue this before, and yes while from a business perspective its priority to make money, I dont define success that way always. Sure Marvel has been running amock for a while since 00 or such, but the quality of films they are spitting out is often a rollercoaster if they were statistics of quality, not money. What do I define as quality? Something made for the art, not just to make a blockbuster that will get asses in seats. In 03 they may have made the horrific catwoman, but recently i cant help but notice they have taken a very serious mindset particularly with their main 2 franchises and have made FILMS. Does it make more money than perhaps X3 and Spiderman, Fantastic 4? Perhaps not, so sue them they wont win a peoples choice award. IMO who cares. Theyre keeping a very strong grasp on what defines a film and are coming out swinging in this manner recently. What do I define as more powerful? This always. Hands down. Money can sometimes be a shallow way to signify victory. So while a movie company may be out for money of course, a film maker or such would want to make the best film possible, and this pov rest assured is not held by a bunch of people just online. Its much more important than that, its about quality first. In this view, DC is acting like Bruce Lee right now.
Chris Wallace said:
And what do you mean "they're running out of main iconic franchises"? Even if that WERE true, they've got plenty of second-stringers that can do well in Tinseltown & apart from that, THEY ARE USING THEM. How many movies have they had in the last 28 years that didn't pertain to Batman or Superman?
They ARE running out of main iconic franchises. The point is, their flagship sagas are on their way out: X-Men has run its course ending with a film with some flaws as a finale and the spinoffs arent guaranteed to be any good but could be, Spiderman is reaching 3 which means its becoming a senior and who knows how long its quality will last beyond that. The backups? Hulk... the remake may be a success so theres a possibility, and the rest of its miscellaneous and not as well known characters. Captain America, Cage, Iron Man etc... theres no doubt if a good amount of these are good marvel can keep afloat when it comes to what a higher minded person sees as success. If theyre not, then theres a good chance if the existing directors stay on course for DC, the 2 main sagas paired with the ocasional backups like V for Vendetta etc can win them the future of QUALITY overall, and Batman and Superman will stomp the quality of Marvel, Also DC has 2 measly ones sure, but HUUGE icons that can tower over these if they are shallow etc.
Of course there is no real competition, however this IS a thread of comparison and there are some noteworthy ones, and this is whats being mentioned here, not a real war of comic companies.
And im well aware of DC not directly making films, WB has been entrusted to do such, but WB in turn have entrusted the correct people it looks like.
"WA-CHAAA!!!" *kick lol
Theres plenty of folks out there who have the more sculpted view on how films should be... they are pleasing this group. Thats a strong comeback, especially for a movie of this sort. Begins, Superman Returns, V For Vendetta.
