The big problem with comic book movies now, they are too convoluted

The Overlord

Superhero
Joined
Mar 10, 2002
Messages
8,923
Reaction score
227
Points
73
The big problem with comic book movies now is that they are too convoluted. You have watch Wanda vision to understand Dr. Strange 2 and you have watch several TV shows to understand who is who in the Marvels movie. Instead of a simple story where Flash fights one of his villains and falls in love with Iris, the Flash movie is about some multiverse nonsense.

Convoluted storytelling is what ruined DC and Marvel comics, it's why Manga is killing them and now it's tainted the movies. I miss the 2000s where I can watch a comic book movie without having to do homework.
 
I want comic book movies to be about as convoluted as the sixth entry in a slasher horror franchise, with at least three cuts being released on home media and a small manual included, which relays vital plot information that was originally in the screenplay but then left on the cutting room floor when it came to filming.
 
Stan Lee once said every book comic is somebody's first.

The more interconnected something is with other parts, not only the more time consuming it is, but more expensive as well. Casuals and those on a smaller budget get left behind.


DC films will also run into even more than The Flash with Gunn wanting the new TV and Film universe and canon to be one and the same.
 
Last edited:
The big problem with comic book movies now is that they are too convoluted. You have watch Wanda vision to understand Dr. Strange 2 and you have watch several TV shows to understand who is who in the Marvels movie. Instead of a simple story where Flash fights one of his villains and falls in love with Iris, the Flash movie is about some multiverse nonsense.

Convoluted storytelling is what ruined DC and Marvel comics, it's why Manga is killing them and now it's tainted the movies. I miss the 2000s where I can watch a comic book movie without having to do homework.
First part i can agree with for sure.
Thats why i get upset when people said Blue Beetle or Aquaman 2 are pointless because they arent part of a bigger universe directly.
I want these Movies mainly to focus on their own, telling a great story itself instead of just being a setup for Multiverse team ups.

Second part sounds too much like the usual Comicsgate nonsense.
Manga is not killing them.
More Mangas in Japan get not picked up or dropped than DC or Marvel Comics.
There is a really twisted idea how the Manga industry is doing in Japan and its kind of messed up.
The amount of Abuse and how Mentally, Physical drained many Manga artists are while getting only scraps, the underhanded tactics how the publishers work etc...the Manga industry is far more toxic than the Comic one...and that despite Western comics having to deal with the Toxic Comicsgate people.

The people who say this whole "Manga kills Western comics" stuff imo have no idea how messed up things are in Japan.
But thats not the point here.

Yes i agree that its too convoluted.
Of course its cool that there is a lot of content and that they branch out etc from this or that...but sometimes having a simple movie would be neat.
 
First part i can agree with for sure.
Thats why i get upset when people said Blue Beetle or Aquaman 2 are pointless because they arent part of a bigger universe directly.
I want these Movies mainly to focus on their own, telling a great story itself instead of just being a setup for Multiverse team ups.

Second part sounds too much like the usual Comicsgate nonsense.
Manga is not killing them.
More Mangas in Japan get not picked up or dropped than DC or Marvel Comics.
There is a really twisted idea how the Manga industry is doing in Japan and its kind of messed up.
The amount of Abuse and how Mentally, Physical drained many Manga artists are while getting only scraps, the underhanded tactics how the publishers work etc...the Manga industry is far more toxic than the Comic one...and that despite Western comics having to deal with the Toxic Comicsgate people.

The people who say this whole "Manga kills Western comics" stuff imo have no idea how messed up things are in Japan.
But thats not the point here.

Yes i agree that its too convoluted.
Of course its cool that there is a lot of content and that they branch out etc from this or that...but sometimes having a simple movie would be neat.

I am not comics gate guy and I am not a big manga fan, but the fact is Manga has a bigger reader base in the US than DC or Marvel comics. A kid get into a new Manga series far easier than he or she could get into American superhero comics. They need less convoluted options at DC or Marvel.

But Marvel and DC need more movies where I only have to watch the movie to understand the plot.
 
Last edited:
I am not comics gate guy and I am not a big manga fan, but the fact is Manga has a bigger reader base in the US than DC or Marvel comics. A kid get into a new Manga series far easier than he or she could get into American superhero comics. They need less convoluted options at DC or Marvel.

But Marvel and DC need more movies where I only have to watch the movie to understand the plot.

I think "need" seems to be the wrong choice of words there since their most heavily connected films are the one's that have done the best, at least for Marvel. Just because films play off other things that have happened doesn't necessarily mean that you can't follow the plot of the film either, it can just mean that you don't catch all the nuances. Hence why a film like Infinity War still has an exposition scene that explains the Infinity Stones. There's even been people saying that the first Marvel film they watched was Endgame (big success makes people curious), and given the extreme BO of that film it's safe to assume that there were a bunch of people that at least had that being their first in the theaters.
 
I think "need" seems to be the wrong choice of words there since their most heavily connected films are the one's that have done the best, at least for Marvel. Just because films play off other things that have happened doesn't necessarily mean that you can't follow the plot of the film either, it can just mean that you don't catch all the nuances. Hence why a film like Infinity War still has an exposition scene that explains the Infinity Stones. There's even been people saying that the first Marvel film they watched was Endgame (big success makes people curious), and given the extreme BO of that film it's safe to assume that there were a bunch of people that at least had that being their first in the theaters.

Except, you wouldn't know why Wanda is a villain in Dr. Strange 2 without seeing WandaVision, her whole motivation is tied to that show. That is asking the audience to do homework to understand the movie.
 
Except, you wouldn't know why Wanda is a villain in Dr. Strange 2 without seeing WandaVision, her whole motivation is tied to that show. That is asking the audience to do homework to understand the movie.

I don't remember all the details shown in MoM but I'm not so sure you can't even follow the plot just because you haven't seen WandaVision (a quick Internet search at least have some arguing that it was understandable). But we can take that as true for the sake of the argument and naming one example isn't much of an argument to support the statement that they "need more movies where I only have to watch the movie to understand the plot". Clearly people got it even with Endgame, which was building on a decade of previous storytelling and character introductions, so it's rather quite unusual that a film would leave you unable to understand the plot. The most successful movie post Endgame, and the most successful non-team superhero film of all time, was basing things on thing that were released 20 years before, in films that previously weren't even tied to the MCU.

So in order to support the statement there would have to be quite a lot of examples where you just can't follow the plot, and even then one would also have to explain why it's something they need to avoid when the most connected things are the most successful.

There are issues with the superhero genre at the moment that makes it less successful than some years ago, but I don't think that interconnectivity can be said to be the cause since it's been it's biggest strength this far. The real problems lie elsewhere.
 
I think as both studios ( DC and Marvel) are heading into hard ,or soft reboot, territories in terms of their shard universes, they need to return emphasis( in terms of the solo films ) to the individual characters and their individual journeys as opposed to tossing in bread crumbs or plot points , which are setting up some team up film several years down the line .

Ultimately, after 20 years, the idea that all these characters are in the same universe is no longer the " Wow !" factor it was in the 00s, as far as the GA is concerned.

For good or ill, it's been done .

That doesn't mean that a shared universe concept in itself is the problem, of course.

But what the studios should do, however, is treat the interconnected universes for DC and Marvel as icing on top of the cake for these individual films .

The shared universe should be a supplement to the material ,and not a hinderance or burden ,which stifles the storytelling possibilities with regards to each of the characters, in their solo films.

The problem Marvel has , at the moment , is that they still have to go through several interconnected ,multiverse, heavy films before they reach their clean slate post Secret Wars.

So for the time being, many of those films between now and then, are gonna feel the weight of continuity, and interconnectedness, before they can start fresh again, and get back to small scale, isolated stories like the first Iron Man film.
 
I don't think its too convoluted. The problem with DCEU and the Multiverse Saga is the quality control. Some of the projects are also a bit random to me. Like a Birds of Prey movie before a Flash movie and a Green Lantern reboot. An Eternals and Thunderbolts movie before the reboot of the Fantastic 4 and the X-Men.
 
I think in general, a big problem with many films (not just ones based on comics), is that they try to be too "hip" or PC. They pander down to the lowest common demographic, and then pretend to be shocked when the film fails.
 
I think in general, a big problem with many films (not just ones based on comics), is that they try to be too "hip" or PC. They pander down to the lowest common demographic, and then pretend to be shocked when the film fails.

Define lowest common demographic. It sounds - due to you also stating "PC" - you're trying to make the same exact "argument" those who scream "woke" all the time do.

In reality, outside of Guardians - the only classical superhero movie that did well last year was: Spider-Verse. The film based on Miles Morales who - when he was first introduced - was denounced by bigots screaming that his existence was "pandering" and being "too politically correct."

Not to mention - 'Black Panther' is the highest earning MCU first installment film and it got nominated for an Academy Award. The second highest earning first installment being 'Captain Marvel.' While 'The Marvels' flopped - most would agree that was due to - as the OP stated - the film being too convoluted in general audiences having needed to see Wandavision, Captain Marvel, and Ms. Marvel to even have some sort of entryway into it.
 
Define lowest common demographic. It sounds - due to you also stating "PC - you're trying to make the same exact "argument" those who scream "woke" all the time do.

In reality, outside of Guardians - the only classical superhero movie that did well last year was: Spider-Verse. The film based on Miles Morales who - when he was first introduced - was denounced by bigots screaming that his existence was "pandering" and being "too politically correct."

Not to mention 'Black Panther' is the highest earning MCU first installment film and it got nominated for an Academy Award.

I don't want to get in trouble, so I won't go into detail on my political stances. But I did enjoy the first two "Guardians" movies, as well as "Black Panther". I still haven't seen "Wakanda Forever" yet, though.
 
I don't want to get in trouble, so I won't go into detail on my political stances. But I did enjoy the first two "Guardians" movies, as well as "Black Panther". I still haven't seen "Wakanda Forever" yet, though.

People's existence both in real life and in films isn't "political." That's to say the world to most isn't defined or divided into white and "political/woke," man and "political/woke," and straight and "political/woke." At the end of the day, most people just care about a film's quality - not that a white, straight, man is the lead.
 
People's existence both in real life and in films isn't "political." That's to say the world to most isn't defined or divided into white and "political/woke," man and "political/woke," and straight and "political/woke." At the end of the day, most people just care about a film's quality - not that a white, straight, man is the lead.
Well in my limited experience, most studio execs are far too concerned with checking off all the right social and cultural boxes. Instead of making a movie that generally appeals to the majority, they choose to pursue narratives that will make this or that group happy...and most of the time, it blows up in their face.
 
They’re all just telling the same story. Need to do away with origin films all together.
 
Straight white men comprised only about 25% of the theatrical audience in the U.S./Canada combined market in 2021. Even less if we're talking about the global market.

2021-mpa-report-demographics-theatergoers.png

2021-mpa-report-demographics-theatergoers-2.png

.53 * 54% = 28.62% Caucasian/white male audience (U.S. + Canada)
.88 * 29% = 25.19% straight Caucasian/white male audience (U.S. + Canada, 88% straight adult population in the Census Survey)

I used the 88% adult straight percentage for both Canada/U.S. because I don't have the figure for Canada.

Sources:
MPA (Motion Picture Association) 2021 THEME Report (latest report available)
 
Last edited:
Well in my limited experience, most studio execs are far too concerned with checking off all the right social and cultural boxes. Instead of making a movie that generally appeals to the majority, they choose to pursue narratives that will make this or that group happy...and most of the time, it blows up in their face.

And telling stories about straight white men aren’t checking off those boxes? What? 😂

Those are still - boxes. Focusing on that is still focusing on identity.

It comes down to, common sense actually, quality - not identity. Audiences don’t have this obsession over straight white men that some people oddly seem to, they just want a solid story that is told well.

The highest earning classic superhero film of last year was Spiderverse. The highest earning film overall was Barbie. Meanwhile Flash, Mission Impossible, Ant Man, and Indiana Jones all did poorly.

If one says ‘Ant Man’ did poorly because of quality whereas ‘The Marvels’ did poorly because of “women!” That says a lot. To most, both did poorly because both lagged in - quality.

Quality, not identity, determines box office.
 
Last edited:
And telling stories about straight white men aren’t checking off those boxes? What? 😂

Those are still - boxes. Focusing on that is still focusing on identity.

It comes down to, common sense actually, quality - not identity. Audiences don’t have this obsession over straight white men that some people oddly seem to, they just want a solid story that is told well.

The highest earning classic superhero film of last year was Spiderverse. The highest earning film overall was Barbie. Meanwhile Flash, Mission Impossible, Ant Man, and Indiana Jones all did poorly.

Quality, not identity, determines box office.
News Flash: About 70% of people in the USA are white, and 90% are straight. If you have a problem with either one, talk to someone else about it, because I'm not taking the bait.

As for Barbie, the character's been a feminist icon since her creation, so making a movie about her was always going to reflect that. But I was still surprised it was such a big hit. The Flash did poorly mainly due to Ezra Miller's legal problems, and I think the same was true with Jonathan Majors for Ant-Man. As for Mission Impossible and Indiana Jones, I'd only be guessing, so commenting at this point is rather self-defeating.
 
Straight white men comprised only about 25% of the theatrical audience in the U.S./Canada combined market in 2021. Even less if we're talking about the global market.

View attachment 84609

.53 * 54% = 28.62% Caucasian/white male audience (U.S. + Canada, 53% male audience in MPA report)
.88 * 29% = 25.19% straight Caucasian/white male audience (U.S. + Canada, 88% straight adult population in the Census Survey)

I used the 88% adult straight percentage for both Canada/U.S. because I don't have the figure for Canada.

Sources:

Exactly. That plus studies have been done showing who drives ticket sales.
News Flash: About 70% of people in the USA are white, and 90% are straight. If you have a problem with either one, talk to someone else about it, because I'm not taking the bait.

As for Barbie, the character's been a feminist icon since her creation, so making a movie about her was always going to reflect that. But I was still surprised it was such a big hit.

News flash - most people don’t care about identity like you clearly do.

If we were to take identity into account though, studies have shown that people of color drive moviegoing.

Suits in the industry typically only care about money and most lean towards being conservative. It is the creatives that are liberal, the financing people who are usually conservative. Thus all they’re doing is following the money.
 
Multiple studies have also reached this conclusion as well.

Editing: changing link as this one may appear as an icon below (I hope) whereas the last one didn’t; based on same study initially posted.

 
Last edited:
Contrary to the phrase “go woke, go broke” - “don’t go woke, go broke.” Again as multiple industry studies have shown.

As said, all suits are doing is ignoring white straight male bigots, demanding to pandered to, in the suits’ pursuit to bring in the highest revenue.

Studies reflecting this don’t “have a problem with” white straight men as including everyone doesn’t mean excluding them (most white straight men aren’t obsessed with being or seeing white men, stated as being one myself); rather it’s - including everyone.

Suits only care about money and as demonstrated studies have shown - that means being inclusive (everyone) rather than exclusive.

 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"