No Shared Universe for DC Films

[jmc]

Avengers isn't successful due to the shared universe, in fact given the story the shared universe is an inconsequential element, it's successful because it's a good fun ride that's also a bit of a novelty, that's it. People aren't going because it's the culmination of this grand universe, they're going because it's a bunch of well known superheroes joining forces and battling aliens and giving the audience an awesome show. It doesn't matter that Loki is the villain or the Teseract was from Cap America, or that Shield are the government agency, all that matters is Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, and Cap are sharing screen time and the film doesn't try to be anything more than that, and it does it fantastically.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

The reason why they would want a shared universe, is because the shared universe provides bootstrapping for new franchises. Presumably WB does want some more series that make money, and using a shared universe to bootstrap them would help, if done right. You wouldn't need to sell a Flash or WW movie entirely on its own standing, but could market it as "the next chapter in the saga of the DCU" or whatnot. Use call forwards to build hype, and try and achieve some transfer between the movie fans of a successful franchise, and the new franchise.

All of these would be good things for DC, because it means they'd build more moneymaking franchises over time. I just don't know if WB is actually willing to put the effort into doing so.

Shared universe got crap to do with setting up franchises.

Is that Black Widow movie actually going to happen? Maybe.


Is Cap2 or Thor2 now going to do on par with Avengers? Will Iron Man 3 keep falling domestically?


A fun cool movie did well. This isn't a game changer.

 

[Thundercrack85]

You wouldn't have the Avengers without a shared universe. Or at least not this specific Avengers film, i.e. the one making more than a billion dollars.

Iron Man, Thor, etc are as well known as they are now due to the films tying into the shared universe. Without them, the film would have never been this successful, if it were ever to be made at all.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

You wouldn't have the Avengers without a shared universe. Or at least not this specific Avengers film, i.e. the one making more than a billion dollars.

Iron Man, Thor, etc are as well known as they are now due to the films tying into the shared universe. Without them, the film would have never been this successful, if it were ever to be made at all.

What? Are you saying that individually the franchises are disposable? Cap and Thor couldn't even break 200 million domestically. I doubt it was because people were just waiting for Avengers.

Batman broke a billion. Avengers broke it as well. There's no correlation that saying anything has to be any way to billion. Iron 3 could and Thor might not.

The integrity of the movies are more important that what characters show up in which. No one cares how many Aliens fight Predators. Nothing beats the franchises seperate entries.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Are you familiar with marketing? The heroes are as popular as they are because of the solo films. Ask people what they thought about Iron Man in 2007 and they would have shrugged. The Iron Man and Downey's performance made Iron Man a relevant part of modern popular culture. There's a reason he's featured most prominently on the Avengers poster. The other characters may have been less successful, but they were still successful, critically and commercially.

Now granted, an Avengers film made in 2008 could still have been commercially successful (or not), but it wouldn't have been the same.

 

[jmc]

You mean the same Avengers movie where I had more than one person ask why Green Lantern wasn't in the film? The success of the movie is down o the execution. If it was crap you really think it would be even half as big as it turned out to be? Frankly, the only ones who give a damn about the shared universe are people like us, no-one else gives a damn how connected thing are or aren't, in fact fans give way to much credit to the shared universe as the reason for the success of the Marvel's series, it has played a small, almost inconsequential role in every movie, including Avengers, what has worked and is the real reason (with some exceptions) is solid film making.

 

[Thundercrack85]

You're just wrong if you don't think that the solo films made the Avengers the success it is. Obviously without a shared universe that couldn't have happened. Ergo, shared universe matters, a lot.

Of course, you'll have someone ask you if Green Lantern is in the film (maybe... really? Green Lantern? Spider-man maybe, but Green Lantern?). But ask that same person this, did they like Iron Man? Did seeing Iron Man, played by the same actor in the trailers and posters make them want to go see this?

 

[jmc]

I never said the solo films didn't contribute, I said the fact that the universe was shared had little if much to do with it at all. The point is the vast majority of people couldn't care less that the films were set in the same universe and probably a large percentage weren't even aware of it, you seriously could have added Wolverine, Spider Man or hell even Batman and no-one would have batted an eyelid. My mother summed it up best when she saw it - 'Oh wow, all these superheroes!'. Point is the shared universe doesn't matter coz most don't care about it.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Are you familiar with marketing? The heroes are as popular as they are because of the solo films. Ask people what they thought about Iron Man in 2007 and they would have shrugged. The Iron Man and Downey's performance made Iron Man a relevant part of modern popular culture. There's a reason he's featured most prominently on the Avengers poster. The other characters may have been less successful, but they were still successful, critically and commercially.

Now granted, an Avengers film made in 2008 could still have been commercially successful (or not), but it wouldn't have been the same.

The thing is that the Trinity are more well-known than any of the Avengers alone.

If Batman can pull a billion, I have no doubt that the other two have the capability. You will never see a billion dollar Captain America movie or Thor.
The Avengers will definitely boost their next films but they won't touch Avengers level. And a good solo DC flick could already outclass both of them. Even the Flash.

So what's the argument for a shared universe? DC heroes don't absolutely need it. If it happens so be it, but it's not like Fantastic Four and X-men will become some juggernaut movie just because the share a link.

 

[Thundercrack85]

You can't compare the Justice League to an X-Men Fantastic Four team up. The Justice League has been a series for half a century.

I would have to see a successful Wonder Woman film before I believe that claim, but regardless, DC has a lot of properties it has done nothing with.

What's the argument for a shared universe? A lot of fans want to see it become a reality, and it could make them billions of dollars. Everyone wins. You think Batman and Superman make a lot of money? The World's Finest combines them. What's one plus one? Or Justice League.

 

[jmc]

They've already made a billion dollars without a shared universe. The only argument is 'fans want to see it' which quite frankly is a bad reason to do it.

 

[El Payaso]

They've already made a billion dollars without a shared universe. The only argument is 'fans want to see it' which quite frankly is a bad reason to do it.

I totally agree. Bad partt of this is that it could still be very profitable and in the name of the money they're able to do anything.

 

[Tobias]

The thing is that the Trinity are more well-known than any of the Avengers alone.

If Batman can pull a billion, I have no doubt that the other two have the capability. You will never see a billion dollar Captain America movie or Thor.
The Avengers will definitely boost their next films but they won't touch Avengers level. And a good solo DC flick could already outclass both of them. Even the Flash.

So what's the argument for a shared universe? DC heroes don't absolutely need it. If it happens so be it, but it's not like Fantastic Four and X-men will become some juggernaut movie just because the share a link.

If by the other two you mean IronMan and Thor then I disagree. I doubt they could make a billion.

In fact I doubt TDKR will come close to a billion.

It really takes a perfect storm, TDK with Leger's death and TA with the brilliantbuild-up/first team film.

Even if there is a perfect storm - Spidey 1 after 9/11 - it does not guarantee a billion. Spidey didn't come close.

As to DC, GL is clearly their potentially most lucrative solo franchise after Batman but no way do I see it ever making near a billion dollars.

Is there another GL-like franchise in DC's staple? Sure. It may be Shazaam or a totally unexpected 2nd/3rd tier property none of us are thnking about. But will it do a billion? Very, very doubtful.

TA and TDK will remain, IMO, the top grossing super-hero franchises for a long, long time if indeed not permanently.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

the fact that tdk already made a billion dollars doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. the avengers has made a billion, and that was the first of three. to expect every avengers film from here on out to be any less lucrative would be to lie to yourself. while this is the conclusion of the nolan saga and will no doubt have plenty of people anticipating, tdkr doesn't seem to have the same steam that tdk had.

 

[CConn]

Um, it's kind of 50/50 about sequels making more than the first movie.

For every TDK and X2, there's a Spider-Man 2 and Iron Man 2.

 

[CConn]

Also, if Avengers made a billion in a week, I'm sure TDKR will make a billion for its entire run.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

the small difference is, all of those films are stand alones in the sense that they aren't set up by a collection of films that conclude in a crescendo. sequels are sequels, but we know when each and every one of them lead to an even bigger film, its a bigger deal.

 

[CConn]

But Spider-Man 2 was a bigger film than Spider-Man 1, that didn't guarantee it a higher box office.

 

[Lencho01]

I don't see much benefit of a shared universe outside of the potential box office for a team-up film. If the solo films do well enough on their own, I think that would be good enough for WB. It's not like all of the Marvel solo films were as big as Avengers or TDK due to being a shared universe, which mainly appeals to the people who were already fans and/or really know who these characters are and which companies they're owned by.

But, it is strange that WB doesn't seem to be more active or at least show that they are active since they gave the impression that DC-related films would replace the Harry Potter films as their go-to franchise to milk. There are of course them going with other franchises they could try to build and/or milk outside of DC stuff.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

lets put it this way,

spiderman 1 was "thriller" while spiderman 2 was "bad"


Thor is "McCartney"
CA is "all things must pass"
IM is "Imagine"
while the hulk is "sentimental journey"

those parts on there own make what they do, while together, you have the chance to make a sgt. pepper's or an abbey road. understand?

Avengers 2 could very well be a dud by comparison to the first, but what I'm saying is, the fact that those characters on there own have had the success they've had and together have had success as well it wouldn't seem likely to me, that would be any less successful.

if its all down hill from there, then marvel ****ed up big time.

 

[jaymes_e06]

The thing is that the Trinity are more well-known than any of the Avengers alone.

If Batman can pull a billion, I have no doubt that the other two have the capability. You will never see a billion dollar Captain America movie or Thor.
The Avengers will definitely boost their next films but they won't touch Avengers level. And a good solo DC flick could already outclass both of them. Even the Flash.

So what's the argument for a shared universe? DC heroes don't absolutely need it. If it happens so be it, but it's not like Fantastic Four and X-men will become some juggernaut movie just because the share a link.

I almost agree with you but the chances of DC making a good film that isn't Batman or Superman related is slim to none.

 

[MadVillainy]

I almost agree with you but the chances of DC making a good film that isn't Batman or Superman related is slim to none.

I dont think that's true at all
unless youre saying DC wont make a good film because they are making non Batman/Superman films

 

[jaymes_e06]

I dont think that's true at all
unless youre saying DC wont make a good film because they are making non Batman/Superman films

What? Not sure what you mean but I really just don't see WB/DC caring much about other characters as much as BM and SM and it shows in how their movie projects are being handled.

If they can give creative control to a Nolan or Nolan like figure, some have suggested Dini which I agree with, than I could believe they would do another BB for another franchise. Until then I just don't see it happening.

 

[MadVillainy]

What? Not sure what you mean but I really just don't see WB/DC caring much about other characters as much as BM and SM and it shows in how their movie projects are being handled.

If they can give creative control to a Nolan or Nolan like figure, some have suggested Dini which I agree with, than I could believe they would do another BB for another franchise. Until then I just don't see it happening.

You said "the chances of DC making a good film that isn't Batman or Superman related is slim to none"

I'm saying I disagree with that because DC has good characters that they can make very good movies with potentially

However, if you're saying DC wont make a good non Batman/Superman film because they arent making Batman and Superman films (after Green Lantern) then I agree with your point

 

[storyteller]

What the solo marvels did was exposed people to these characters. Honestly not everyone is going to be a fan of the Hulk. Not everyone is going to be a fan of Iron Man, Thor, or Captain America. But certainly if you saw a few of the films then you get some investment in the ensemble. Keep in mind that Marvel was thinking long term. get all these characters out, make the avengers, and then pop out all the sequels( and get another ensemble out). This was all about establishing a business that wasn't just one character.

The Wb simply doesn't have that safety net.It all comes down to a plan and the Wb sure as hell doesn't have one.