Since DCEU copies MCU as much as they can,will they do a black lead like Blk Panther?

[guyisnotcool]

https://***********/adcfanboy/status/965010520054075392

This.

That's a solid idea.

 

[fan4stic]

Yet industrualized countries around the world also have lots of people but dont suffer from daily mass shootings. Its almost as if the easy access to devices designed to kill lots of people in an efficient manner create an environment in which that sort of thing happens. Crazy!

But people didn't have guns for hundreds of years and they srtill found a way to mass murder. Have you ever thought that maybe some of the people in america are the problem and not the weapons themselves?

 

[Flint Marko]

Again... Which is it? And which films in the DCEU exactly have been aiming to ape MCU films? Maybe Suicide Squad? Maybe? Sad to say though films with rag tag bands of misfits that use pop culture songs in the soundtrack predate the MCU, though this might be shocking to the various 20 somethings and younger online these days.

We've had this discussion before. You realize no one has ever said that Guardians was the first movie ever to market itself that way, right? And that something doesn't have to be the first to be blatantly ripped off, which is absolutely the case with SS? There's no "maybe" about it.

 

[Mandon Knight]

The one thing MCU has over DCEU is traction, in the sense that 'they got there first'. In the actual history of comics, Marvel have consistently got out their tracing paper and stolen concepts and ideas.

 

[Spider-Fan]

The one thing MCU has over DCEU is traction, in the sense that 'they got there first'. In the actual history of comics, Marvel have consistently got out their tracing paper and stolen concepts and ideas.

That goes both ways good sir.

 

[semper]

The one thing MCU has over DCEU is traction, in the sense that 'they got there first'. In the actual history of comics, Marvel have consistently got out their tracing paper and stolen concepts and ideas.

In comics history, both companies have stolen concepts and ideas in pretty equal measure over the decades. For example in the 1970's Marvel revamp their failing X-Men title into an international soap opera with a mixed cast of new members. It becomes a massive hit under the stewardship of Chris Claremont.

DC decide they want some of that action. So they revamp their mediocre teen sidekick title Teen Titans into an international soap opera with a mixed cast of new members. And hence, the New Teen Titans was born, DC's very direct attempt to rip-off the intrigue of the revamped X-Men title, and to appeal to the same audience who enjoyed soap opera relationships with their superheroics.

 

[atomicbattery]

That goes both ways good sir.

Kinda, but not really.
Sorry, but Mandon Knight is mostly right.

DC ([National) was the gold-standard, dominant publisher for the first thirty years of comics’ existence. Marvel (Timely) was a second-rate (being generous here) publisher that followed whatever trends were popular at the more successful companies.
DC invented the superhero concept with Superman, and then Batman- and Marvel jumped on.
When the popularity of superheroes declined after World War II, Marvel quit the concept, moving on to other popular trends like war, western, and romance comics.

DC was the only continuing publisher of superhero comics.
Marvel did not publish a single superhero book during the entire decade of the 1950’s.
It was only when DC published Justice League of America to enormous success in 1960 that Marvel decided to follow DC once again and get back in the superhero business. Marvel published Fantastic Four#1 in 1961 and the Marvel age began. But, even then, Marvel was something of a ragtag outfit that imitated the popular concepts created at the more successful companies.
An excellent resource for information on this is Comichron.com.
Reliable sales information is available beginning in 1960. The biggest comics companies in the early sixties were DC, Archie, Dell, Gold Key.
Even with the hits of the new Marvel Universe in the early ‘60’s, Marvel doesn’t have a book break into the top twenty in sales until 1966, with Amazing Spider-Man at #16 (it is interesting to note that eleven of the top fifteen books that year were DC).

The Marvel universe would simply not exist, twice, if not for the company following hit concepts created at DC.
What Marvel did do, however, was give new life to what, in 1960, was the somewhat stale superhero concept.
Since the early fifties, superheroes had been neutered at DC by the publication of ‘Seduction if the Innocent’, congressional hearings, and the Comics Code.
Batman and Superman had become as harmless and unthreatening as Donald Duck, Archie, and Richie Rich, created exclusively for the entertainment of five-to-eleven year-olds.
The innovation at Marvel- whether done wittingly or not- was recognizing a massive, underserved population of baby boomers now in their teens who still loved comics but didn’t have books to read in a market serving juveniles.
The new Marvel heroes had flaws, bickered, and were often full of self pity- perfect heroes for the most self-absorbed generation in history.
DC then followed Marvel- from the late sixties on Batman, Superman and the rest of the DC universe became increasingly complex and ‘mature’, just like the Marvel heroes.
Since the seventies, the companies have been swapping creators and imitating concepts in a pretty endless Merry-go-round.

But the essential, indisputable (although I’m sure somebody will) fact remains there is simply no Marvel Universe at all, TWICE, except for the company following DC.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Kinda, but not really.
Sorry, but Mandon Knight is mostly right.

DC ([National) was the gold-standard, dominant publisher for the first thirty years of comics’ existence. Marvel (Timely) was a second-rate (being generous here) publisher that followed whatever trends were popular at the more successful companies.
DC invented the superhero concept with Superman, and then Batman- and Marvel jumped on.
When the popularity of superheroes declined after World War II, Marvel quit the concept, moving on to other popular trends like war, western, and romance comics.

DC was the only continuing publisher of superhero comics.
Marvel did not publish a single superhero book during the entire decade of the 1950’s.
It was only when DC published Justice League of America to enormous success in 1960 that Marvel decided to follow DC once again and get back in the superhero business. Marvel published Fantastic Four#1 in 1961 and the Marvel age began. But, even then, Marvel was something of a ragtag outfit that imitated the popular concepts created at the more successful companies.
An excellent resource for information on this is Comichron.com.
Reliable sales information is available beginning in 1960. The biggest comics companies in the early sixties were DC, Archie, Dell, Gold Key.
Even with the hits of the new Marvel Universe in the early ‘60’s, Marvel doesn’t have a book break into the top twenty in sales until 1966, with Amazing Spider-Man at #16 (it is interesting to note that eleven of the top fifteen books that year were DC).

The Marvel universe would simply not exist, twice, if not for the company following hit concepts created at DC.
What Marvel did do, however, was give new life to what, in 1960, was the somewhat stale superhero concept.
Since the early fifties, superheroes had been neutered at DC by the publication of ‘Seduction if the Innocent’, congressional hearings, and the Comics Code.
Batman and Superman had become as harmless and unthreatening as Donald Duck, Archie, and Richie Rich, created exclusively for the entertainment of five-to-eleven year-olds.
The innovation at Marvel- whether done wittingly or not- was recognizing a massive, underserved population of baby boomers now in their teens who still loved comics but didn’t have books to read in a market serving juveniles.
The new Marvel heroes had flaws, bickered, and were often full of self pity- perfect heroes for the most self-absorbed generation in history.
DC then followed Marvel- from the late sixties on Batman, Superman and the rest of the DC universe became increasingly complex and ‘mature’, just like the Marvel heroes.
Since the seventies, the companies have been swapping creators and imitating concepts in a pretty endless Merry-go-round.

But the essential, indisputable (although I’m sure somebody will) fact remains there is simply no Marvel Universe at all, TWICE, except for the company following DC.

Very interesting read

 

[Spider-Fan]

Kinda, but not really.
Sorry, but Mandon Knight is mostly right.

DC ([National) was the gold-standard, dominant publisher for the first thirty years of comics’ existence. Marvel (Timely) was a second-rate (being generous here) publisher that followed whatever trends were popular at the more successful companies.
DC invented the superhero concept with Superman, and then Batman- and Marvel jumped on.
When the popularity of superheroes declined after World War II, Marvel quit the concept, moving on to other popular trends like war, western, and romance comics.

DC was the only continuing publisher of superhero comics.
Marvel did not publish a single superhero book during the entire decade of the 1950’s.
It was only when DC published Justice League of America to enormous success in 1960 that Marvel decided to follow DC once again and get back in the superhero business. Marvel published Fantastic Four#1 in 1961 and the Marvel age began. But, even then, Marvel was something of a ragtag outfit that imitated the popular concepts created at the more successful companies.
An excellent resource for information on this is Comichron.com.
Reliable sales information is available beginning in 1960. The biggest comics companies in the early sixties were DC, Archie, Dell, Gold Key.
Even with the hits of the new Marvel Universe in the early ‘60’s, Marvel doesn’t have a book break into the top twenty in sales until 1966, with Amazing Spider-Man at #16 (it is interesting to note that eleven of the top fifteen books that year were DC).

The Marvel universe would simply not exist, twice, if not for the company following hit concepts created at DC.
What Marvel did do, however, was give new life to what, in 1960, was the somewhat stale superhero concept.
Since the early fifties, superheroes had been neutered at DC by the publication of ‘Seduction if the Innocent’, congressional hearings, and the Comics Code.
Batman and Superman had become as harmless and unthreatening as Donald Duck, Archie, and Richie Rich, created exclusively for the entertainment of five-to-eleven year-olds.
The innovation at Marvel- whether done wittingly or not- was recognizing a massive, underserved population of baby boomers now in their teens who still loved comics but didn’t have books to read in a market serving juveniles.
The new Marvel heroes had flaws, bickered, and were often full of self pity- perfect heroes for the most self-absorbed generation in history.
DC then followed Marvel- from the late sixties on Batman, Superman and the rest of the DC universe became increasingly complex and ‘mature’, just like the Marvel heroes.
Since the seventies, the companies have been swapping creators and imitating concepts in a pretty endless Merry-go-round.

But the essential, indisputable (although I’m sure somebody will) fact remains there is simply no Marvel Universe at all, TWICE, except for the company following DC.

I'm not disputing much of what you're saying as far as the publication history is concerned. But, DC copied plenty of power sets and characters from Marvel over the years, as well. Lest we forget Namor predates Aquaman by about 2 years. I could give many more examples, but that is prob the most high profile one.

 

[semper]

Kinda, but not really.
Sorry, but Mandon Knight is mostly right.

DC ([National) was the gold-standard, dominant publisher for the first thirty years of comics’ existence. Marvel (Timely) was a second-rate (being generous here) publisher that followed whatever trends were popular at the more successful companies.
DC invented the superhero concept with Superman, and then Batman- and Marvel jumped on.
When the popularity of superheroes declined after World War II, Marvel quit the concept, moving on to other popular trends like war, western, and romance comics.

DC was the only continuing publisher of superhero comics.
Marvel did not publish a single superhero book during the entire decade of the 1950’s.
It was only when DC published Justice League of America to enormous success in 1960 that Marvel decided to follow DC once again and get back in the superhero business. Marvel published Fantastic Four#1 in 1961 and the Marvel age began. But, even then, Marvel was something of a ragtag outfit that imitated the popular concepts created at the more successful companies.
An excellent resource for information on this is Comichron.com.
Reliable sales information is available beginning in 1960. The biggest comics companies in the early sixties were DC, Archie, Dell, Gold Key.
Even with the hits of the new Marvel Universe in the early ‘60’s, Marvel doesn’t have a book break into the top twenty in sales until 1966, with Amazing Spider-Man at #16 (it is interesting to note that eleven of the top fifteen books that year were DC).

The Marvel universe would simply not exist, twice, if not for the company following hit concepts created at DC.
What Marvel did do, however, was give new life to what, in 1960, was the somewhat stale superhero concept.
Since the early fifties, superheroes had been neutered at DC by the publication of ‘Seduction if the Innocent’, congressional hearings, and the Comics Code.
Batman and Superman had become as harmless and unthreatening as Donald Duck, Archie, and Richie Rich, created exclusively for the entertainment of five-to-eleven year-olds.
The innovation at Marvel- whether done wittingly or not- was recognizing a massive, underserved population of baby boomers now in their teens who still loved comics but didn’t have books to read in a market serving juveniles.
The new Marvel heroes had flaws, bickered, and were often full of self pity- perfect heroes for the most self-absorbed generation in history.
DC then followed Marvel- from the late sixties on Batman, Superman and the rest of the DC universe became increasingly complex and ‘mature’, just like the Marvel heroes.
Since the seventies, the companies have been swapping creators and imitating concepts in a pretty endless Merry-go-round.

But the essential, indisputable (although I’m sure somebody will) fact remains there is simply no Marvel Universe at all, TWICE, except for the company following DC.

It's not news to any comic historian that Marvel as we truly know it, didn't really come into effect till the 1960's with Stan Lee (and his collaboraters like Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko) became the driving force of the company. DC came first. But Marvel took the concept of superheroes somewhere DC never even considered, which in many ways was just as important, because it pushed the medium forward. As you said, Marvel gaves us heroes with flaws, money problems, simple relatable human stuff. That was revolutionary. DC had to copy that approach or face the redundancy, because there was no going back to that simplistic approach to Superhero stories once the Marvel age got started.

But good read

 

[RomanticPenguin]

edit: don't wanna drag this out, nevermind

 

[Rorschach2012]

I don't think there's any denying that both Marvel and DC have stolen from one another fairly equally over the years.

 

[Rorschach2012]

I think we can bet on WB retooling their Green Lantern Corps concept as we speak. After this past weekend, you bet your ass that John Stewart will be front and center in the next Green Lantern movie.

I feel silly for how hard I fanboyed over Hal Jordan over the years. He's a more developed character because there was a serious initiative over the years to place most of the attention and development upon him. But John, with the right creative team, can be just as strong of a character as Hal.

I want to apologize for how heated I got about my love for Hal Jordan. I love him as a character and still think the Geoff Johns run is the best thing that ever happened to any Green Lantern, but Hal just isn't the guy to lead the franchise.

John is. I have no doubt about that now.

Honestly, he would have far more cultural importance than Hal Jordan could ever have. Unfortunately, black superheroes are majorly underrepresented in the media. John is THE standout black superhero in DC. DC has a million average white superheroes, Hal probably wouldn't really even catch on or stand out. John can be so much more than that.

 

[Tg11]

John Stewart

 

[Rorschach2012]

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think we can bet on WB retooling their Green Lantern Corps concept as we speak. After this past weekend, you bet your ass that John Stewart will be front and center in the next Green Lantern movie.

I feel silly for how hard I fanboyed over Hal Jordan over the years. He's a more developed character because there was a serious initiative over the years to place most of the attention and development upon him. But John, with the right creative team, can be just as strong of a character as Hal.

I want to apologize for how heated I got about my love for Hal Jordan. I love him as a character and still think the Geoff Johns run is the best thing that ever happened to any Green Lantern, but Hal just isn't the guy to lead the franchise.

John is. I have no doubt about that now.

Honestly, he would have far more cultural importance than Hal Jordan could ever have. Unfortunately, black superheroes are majorly underrepresented in the media. John is THE standout black superhero in DC. DC has a million average white superheroes, Hal probably wouldn't really even catch on or stand out. John can be so much more than that.

My favorite GL has always been Kyle, and I know that I am in the minority on that. But, I thought using John was the best move in the first place. There has been a great effort in recent years to make Hal more interesting, but I just feel like he was less interesting than John was basically until Geoff Johns came along.

John I think can do for DC what Black Panther is doing now, like you said, but he can explore it HIS way without it feeling like just an answer to T'Challa. John is a great character.

 

[The Guard]

There's really no reason not to develop and use the Corps itself, which means focusing on multiple Green Lanterns. Those have been the most successful and satisfying modern day stories for the mythos. You want to deal with race relationships? Deal with it on a cosmic scale and a more human one at the same time with the use of the Corps and its dynamics.

 

[InfinityWar]

Even when DCEU tries to do their own black super hero lead, it will not nearly hit as big as Black Panther. Black Panther was so rooted in Africa and the message resonated so well with the black folks. Besides the tech, the film was grounded in reality. Green Lantern is so sci fi and all about space stuff. It wont have any African culture or african roots like Black Panther.

DCEU could have got there first with the first black super hero, but they spent all their money on Will Smith in Suicide Squad - and not many ppl were rallying behind that film. Killmonger >>>> CGI Dancing super model Villain

 

[metaphysician]

John Stewart

*points up* This. If WB were serious about making a black-led movie, this is the one they would do.

 

[MbJ]

Even when DCEU tries to do their own black super hero lead, it will not nearly hit as big as Black Panther.

There only gets to be one first, so yeah no matter what they're not gonna be able to recreate the hype of being the first big black superhero movie of the modern era (by modern I mean post-Iron Man). Just like I won't be surprised if Captain Marvel doesn't match the hype or success of Wonder Woman.

But that doesn't mean WB shouldn't try. Even if it's for cynical purposes, more diversity in a genre sorely lacking it is good.

 

[semper]

Just like I won't be surprised if Captain Marvel doesn't match the hype or success of Wonder Woman.
.

At this point, would you really bet against Marvel though?

I can easily see a scenario where all the elements fall into place (great trailer, killer promo tour, great reviews) and Captain Marvel outgrosses Wonder Woman.

Marvel does this time and time again.

 

[Lead Cenobite]

Even when DCEU tries to do their own black super hero lead, it will not nearly hit as big as Black Panther. Black Panther was so rooted in Africa and the message resonated so well with the black folks. Besides the tech, the film was grounded in reality. Green Lantern is so sci fi and all about space stuff. It wont have any African culture or african roots like Black Panther.

DCEU could have got there first with the first black super hero, but they spent all their money on Will Smith in Suicide Squad - and not many ppl were rallying behind that film. Killmonger >>>> CGI Dancing super model Villain

It's kind of short-sighted to assume that no other black-led superhero movie can beat Black Panther if the character isn't born in Africa and the movie isn't all about African culture. Hell, it's silly to assume that a space-oriented movie with a black lead wouldn't be as big a hit because it isn't grounded in reality and African culture. Hello, Star Wars? Guardians of the Galaxy? A movie doesn't have to be grounded and about any Earth culture to be a massive hit.

Also, the topic title and your posts come off as slightly fanboyish and trollish. Sorry if that wasn't your intent. Still, did you really think "Since DCEU copies MCU as much as they can" is the best way to come in and start a discussion here? I'm not even much of a fan of the DCEU and it still seems rude to me.

 

[unholyrevenger]

DCEU could have got there first with the first black super hero,

Could have?

 

[MbJ]

It's kind of short-sighted to assume that no other black-led superhero movie can beat Black Panther if the character isn't born in Africa and the movie isn't all about African culture.

I'd take the culture argument out of it entirely and say I don't expect any other black superhero film to match Black Panther's box office gross period, whether that be Cyborg, Green Lantern, Vixen or Static.

Black Panther is lightning in a bottle right now. Nobody thought it would break this big.

 

[CLARKY]

Cyborg will be DCEU's answer to Black Panther ?

I think DCEU / WB copies Marvel blue print when they see Marvel making all the money. If Black Panther is financially successful and all the great press, you guys think DCEU will once again copy Marvel and do 'their version' of a black lead with their only black hero - Cyborg ?

I'm not following yourthinking here. I think this is exactly why DC movies aren't doing well, because they suffer the comparison too much. I mean, it's ok, of course they saw it coming, of course it's all about business, of course they are competitors, but Marvel is the winner/dominant one here. Flash fact, as they say. Marvel is not the winner because they had Marvel ideas, but because they had GOOD ideas. Like the little teasing at the end of the movie for instance.
DC mistake has been / would be to consider every good idea was Marvel's. Some ideas are just great because they are what a cinematic universe would best need, Marvel or not.
Like having a movie for a character before making the big team is, IMO, THE best idea. DC/Warner/Snyder wanted to do it differently, it's fine, but I think they were wrong. In the end, their idea did not work.
Look at the cartoons, the top cartoons are theBTAS, STAS, batman beyond and the JL/JLU. No Marvel cartoon has ever topped that. But it's fine. And when MArvel did Avengers EMH, it has aJLU vibe in the thinking. Of course ! They would be silly to purposely avoid it !

DC/Warner should not avoid taken ideas from Marvel if they think it's a fine idea that allow them to developp their characters on screen. It does not have to be the same, but it would be quite idiotic to purposely avoid any good idea as pretending it's a Marvel one.

To be quite honest... I think it was a mistake for DC to try to make Cyborg their premiere Black hero.
Static and John Stewart were both more than equipped to take on that role. Cyborg is best utilized on the Titans. It's a team where he can truly shine.
My feelings about Static aside, I'm still upset that WB went with Cyborg for the JL movie. It should've been John Stewart in his place. The Justice League doesn't feel like the Justice League without a Green Lantern.

Yes, I think so too. I disagree about Static (although I agree with you he became more "equipped" than Cyborg for a movie) but I agree about John Stewart. A lot of people growing up with the JLU know him, comic readers too, he's one of the few black heroes that is actually important. And yes, a JL without a GL ... seems a bit empty.
I also understand that they wanted to push Cyborg because he's in the comics at the moment. And I think the idea is very good in theory : they have a black face now and they have a hero who is connected to all computer/phone/screen/App/techno-whatever. So it attracts a young audience. I understand the idea.
But I keep thinking that GL would have been better. In the comics AND in the movie.

Following what I wrote just aboveabout "copiing" Marvel. Now if DC/Warner have John Stewart in a movie, yeah, people will believe that DC copies Marvel. They had the chance to make it first.