Why Can't DC Get it right? - Part 1

[The Joker]

That's absolutely right!

How stupid and bad Marvel have been to make 9 billion dollars on the way to a battle with Thanos with a series of well received, well reviewed movies.

Why, it's much better to get straight into the team movie after two poorly received, underwhelming movies that disappointed at the box office and were divisive amongst fans and the GA!

 

[jmc]

I've been thinking over this for a while now, and the conclusion I've come to is had WB planned this right from the start, and especially after the response from BvS, Wonder Woman should have been the first character in a shared universe. In hindsight this is how I would have done things:

JUN 2013: Wonder Woman
JUN 2014: Man of Steel
JUN 2015: Batman

So why this order? For starters the most exciting thing people reacted to in BvS was Wonder Woman. It's fair to assume then that a Wonder Woman solo film could have been made years ago, but WB was too hesitant to make it then.

"But why does this matter? Superman is bigger than Wonder Woman, it makes sense for him start the franchise, right? He's the most well known". Not so fast. If we also go further back a few years what did Iron Man bring to the genre? Freshness. Up until then the superhero market was essentially Batman, Superman, X-men and Spider-Man dominating to various degrees, with a smattering of lesser franchises here and there. Iron Man's succeeded in many ways but it being a totally new character well and truly would have played its part.

Wonder Woman I believe would have been the shot in the arm an infant DCEU would have needed to launch. It would have started the franchise off on a newer path, which would then be followed up by Superman 2 years later, Batman in 2016, and finally a DC Trinity movie in 2017.

"A Trinity movie? But what of Justice League?" Here's the thing with the WB, they have the advantage over Marvel in that they have three of the most famous icons in history. That means you don't need to do JL immediately. There was no real half way point for Marvel to get to Avengers, it was 4 solo films then, boom, giant team up movie, followed by a similar team up movie 3 years later. What was one of the chief issues with Age of Ultron? It felt familiar.

WB had the advantage where they could have used a Trinity film as a stepping stone to JL and increasing the number of new characters in the build up, resulting in a schedule like this:

JUN 2016: Trinity
APR 2017: Flash
NOV 2017: Wonder Woman 2
APR 2018: Aquaman
JUN 2018: Man of Steel 2
JUN 2019: Batman 2
NOV 2019: Green Lantern
JUN 2020: Justice League

It starts with a fresh face in Wonder Woman, continues with tried and true heroes in Superman and Batman with their own stories, culminating with the three meeting together for the first time 3 years later. That's the first build up to JL. You follow that up with an increase in films for new characters in Flash, Aquaman and Green Lantern mixing in with sequels for the other characters, and then hit the audience with JL after that.

 

[Victarion]

They should definitely get Miller and Black in the DC movie universe. Let Snyder be your idea guy, then have these two refine and mold those ideas. I did like a lot of Snyder's ideas, so combining those with talents like Miller and Black = funtimes for Victarion.

 

[Kobra]

They should definitely get Miller and Black in the DC movie universe. Let Snyder be your idea guy, then have these two refine and mold those ideas. I did like a lot of Snyder's ideas, so combining those with talents like Miller and Black = funtimes for Victarion.

It's not that clear which ideas Snyder actually had. And most of the great things about the movie didn't really come from him. They came from the source.

If getting it right means doing movies on the level of Marvel's, then i prefer them to get it wrong. MCU's product just doesn't excite me one bit. It's not the kind of film i truly respect. But neither is BvS.

I don't like the cinematic universe approach. I don't like that things happen or don't happen in a story because of future films. Nolan's approach was the opposite, that's why those movies were so good. I actually felt intrigued by the story and there was always a sense that ANYTHING could happen. I like that and i don't get that from Marvel. The Marvel product works this way because i feel their movies are more like sitcoms. It's all about making a situation funny and interesting. It's all about the fireworks, not so much the narrative. The entire movie could just be RDJ eating pizza that it would still be entertaining. But i don't think you should try to make DC heroes work in the same way. DC should aim for something different.

Also, hire proven professionals. Don't hire people who have never made a really good movie before. Is this that difficult? Hire a good director, hire a good writer. What's so hard about this? You have billions and billions of dollars and you can't get a proven director to direct your Batman and Superman movies? This is just stupidity beyond belief. This is the kind of thing that even a ******ed chimpanzee would get it right. If you shot me in the head and turned me into a vegetable, i would still get it right. A 10 yo Justin Bieber fan would get it right. Paris Hilton would get it right.

 

[StormC]

I'd rather watch 2 hours of RDJ eating pizza than either of the DCEU movies.

WB lacks a personal closeness to the source material that Marvel Studios (and Kevin Feige) have.

 

[brandeezy89]

I'd rather watch 2 hours of RDJ eating pizza than either of the DCEU movies.

WB lacks a personal closeness to the source material that Marvel Studios (and Kevin Feige) have.

Not really, i can name a couple of things off the back that differ from source material.

- The fake Mandarin
- Tony creates Ultron
- No Ant-Man or Wasp as founding members
- The Ancient One is a white lady

There's probably more i'm missing

Also, hire proven professionals. Don't hire people who have never made a really good movie before. Is this that difficult? Hire a good director, hire a good writer. What's so hard about this? You have billions and billions of dollars and you can't get a proven director to direct your Batman and Superman movies? This is just stupidity beyond belief. This is the kind of thing that even a ******ed chimpanzee would get it right. If you shot me in the head and turned me into a vegetable, i would still get it right. A 10 yo Justin Bieber fan would get it right. Paris Hilton would get it right.

Good directors and script writers can also make bad movies, it's the luck of the draw. If it were that easy then a lot of people on this board wouldn't be posting about what they would do. Remember you're on the outside looking in.

 

[StormC]

I meant that they're close to the source material in that they are personally associated with it; Marvel Studios is homegrown out of Marvel's company. WB isn't the same with DC.

 

[batfreakforever]

I've been thinking over this for a while now, and the conclusion I've come to is had WB planned this right from the start, and especially after the response from BvS, Wonder Woman should have been the first character in a shared universe. In hindsight this is how I would have done things:

JUN 2013: Wonder Woman
JUN 2014: Man of Steel
JUN 2015: Batman

So why this order? For starters the most exciting thing people reacted to in BvS was Wonder Woman. It's fair to assume then that a Wonder Woman solo film could have been made years ago, but WB was too hesitant to make it then.

"But why does this matter? Superman is bigger than Wonder Woman, it makes sense for him start the franchise, right? He's the most well known". Not so fast. If we also go further back a few years what did Iron Man bring to the genre? Freshness. Up until then the superhero market was essentially Batman, Superman, X-men and Spider-Man dominating to various degrees, with a smattering of lesser franchises here and there. Iron Man's succeeded in many ways but it being a totally new character well and truly would have played its part.

Wonder Woman I believe would have been the shot in the arm an infant DCEU would have needed to launch. It would have started the franchise off on a newer path, which would then be followed up by Superman 2 years later, Batman in 2016, and finally a DC Trinity movie in 2017.

"A Trinity movie? But what of Justice League?" Here's the thing with the WB, they have the advantage over Marvel in that they have three of the most famous icons in history. That means you don't need to do JL immediately. There was no real half way point for Marvel to get to Avengers, it was 4 solo films then, boom, giant team up movie, followed by a similar team up movie 3 years later. What was one of the chief issues with Age of Ultron? It felt familiar.

WB had the advantage where they could have used a Trinity film as a stepping stone to JL and increasing the number of new characters in the build up, resulting in a schedule like this:

JUN 2016: Trinity
APR 2017: Flash
NOV 2017: Wonder Woman 2
APR 2018: Aquaman
JUN 2018: Man of Steel 2
JUN 2019: Batman 2
NOV 2019: Green Lantern
JUN 2020: Justice League

It starts with a fresh face in Wonder Woman, continues with tried and true heroes in Superman and Batman with their own stories, culminating with the three meeting together for the first time 3 years later. That's the first build up to JL. You follow that up with an increase in films for new characters in Flash, Aquaman and Green Lantern mixing in with sequels for the other characters, and then hit the audience with JL after that.

DC will do it their way and not the in the ways people dictate them to. Its perfect the way it is but got slammed because it wasn't the way people preferred or predicted.

 

[batfreakforever]

Was BvS anyway that you wanted?

 

[Rowsdower!]

I've been thinking over this for a while now, and the conclusion I've come to is had WB planned this right from the start, and especially after the response from BvS, Wonder Woman should have been the first character in a shared universe. In hindsight this is how I would have done things:

JUN 2013: Wonder Woman
JUN 2014: Man of Steel
JUN 2015: Batman

So why this order? For starters the most exciting thing people reacted to in BvS was Wonder Woman. It's fair to assume then that a Wonder Woman solo film could have been made years ago, but WB was too hesitant to make it then.

"But why does this matter? Superman is bigger than Wonder Woman, it makes sense for him start the franchise, right? He's the most well known". Not so fast. If we also go further back a few years what did Iron Man bring to the genre? Freshness. Up until then the superhero market was essentially Batman, Superman, X-men and Spider-Man dominating to various degrees, with a smattering of lesser franchises here and there. Iron Man's succeeded in many ways but it being a totally new character well and truly would have played its part.

Wonder Woman I believe would have been the shot in the arm an infant DCEU would have needed to launch. It would have started the franchise off on a newer path, which would then be followed up by Superman 2 years later, Batman in 2016, and finally a DC Trinity movie in 2017.

"A Trinity movie? But what of Justice League?" Here's the thing with the WB, they have the advantage over Marvel in that they have three of the most famous icons in history. That means you don't need to do JL immediately. There was no real half way point for Marvel to get to Avengers, it was 4 solo films then, boom, giant team up movie, followed by a similar team up movie 3 years later. What was one of the chief issues with Age of Ultron? It felt familiar.

WB had the advantage where they could have used a Trinity film as a stepping stone to JL and increasing the number of new characters in the build up, resulting in a schedule like this:

JUN 2016: Trinity
APR 2017: Flash
NOV 2017: Wonder Woman 2
APR 2018: Aquaman
JUN 2018: Man of Steel 2
JUN 2019: Batman 2
NOV 2019: Green Lantern
JUN 2020: Justice League

It starts with a fresh face in Wonder Woman, continues with tried and true heroes in Superman and Batman with their own stories, culminating with the three meeting together for the first time 3 years later. That's the first build up to JL. You follow that up with an increase in films for new characters in Flash, Aquaman and Green Lantern mixing in with sequels for the other characters, and then hit the audience with JL after that.

That is a good idea. Hell, people acted like Wonder Woman was amazing in BvS even though she barely did anything. People have wanted to see the character for so long, she was the only thing in that movie that people didn't rip apart. And the point about Iron Man being new and fresh is a good one; it was something audiences hadn't seen before.

However, I also think Iron Man's success had a lot to do with RDJ's talent and charisma. I think that's a problem with WB's casting choices so far. They have some good actors in the roles but so far, no one stands out like RDJ did. But that may come down to direction. I feel that Cavill, Affleck and maybe Gadot, Momoa and Miller COULD turn in performances that at least rival some of Marvel's best (RDJ is on another level but maybe something comparable to Evans or Pratt is possible), but they need a director who can bring that out of them. But Snyder isn't the guy who can do that.

 

[Kobra]

Not really, i can name a couple of things off the back that differ from source material.

- The fake Mandarin
- Tony creates Ultron
- No Ant-Man or Wasp as founding members
- The Ancient One is a white lady

There's probably more i'm missing



Good directors and script writers can also make bad movies, it's the luck of the draw. If it were that easy then a lot of people on this board wouldn't be posting about what they would do. Remember you're on the outside looking in.

That doesn't change anything. If you're gonna hire someone, hire someone good.

 

[Erzengel]

This wasn't Snyder's first foray into CBM. I never had the warmest of fuzzies that he could set up the DC Universe.

 

[StormC]

I actually love the idea of kickstarting a DCEU with Wonder Woman. It's a damn shame we missed that opportunity.

 

[DrCosmic]

Not really, i can name a couple of things off the back that differ from source material.

- The fake Mandarin
- Tony creates Ultron
- No Ant-Man or Wasp as founding members
- The Ancient One is a white lady

There's probably more i'm missing.

It's not about not departing from the source material, it's having a love for it in the first place so you make the "right" departures, that is, departures that anger a small group of longtime fans rather than departures that make the entire franchise less interesting to everyone.

Also, personal attachment to the source materials means even the things you keep the same have the same kind of feel as what initially drew everyone to those characters. DC had Nolan, who didn't really have that, and he managed, through brilliance, to make something anyway that touched on the most primal aspects of Batman, and was awesome, so DC never learned the lesson that the creators have to have a personal love for the mythos, or else you're very unlikely to come up with something that people have a personal love for.

Also, hire proven professionals. Don't hire people who have never made a really good movie before. Is this that difficult? Hire a good director, hire a good writer. What's so hard about this? You have billions and billions of dollars and you can't get a proven director to direct your Batman and Superman movies? This is just stupidity beyond belief. This is the kind of thing that even a ******ed chimpanzee would get it right. If you shot me in the head and turned me into a vegetable, i would still get it right. A 10 yo Justin Bieber fan would get it right. Paris Hilton would get it right.

I think you're overreacting a bit. Snyder is much more proven than Jon Favreau or Peyton Read or Alan Taylor or The Russo Brothers or Joe Johnston. In terms of box office credibility, he's more of a "professional" than any MCU director pre-MCU. Especially Whedon and the Russos.

And while is storytelling is weak at times, his shots are brilliant. Period. He makes really good looking scenes. Goyer's credentials are also significantly more prestigious in the professional world than Art Marcum and Matt Halloway ("WHO!?")

So professionalism isn't the missing ingredient. Marvel knows to hire people who are less professional, less experienced, who are more invested in the characters and the success of that single film. If Marvel gets someone who likes the character, and who feels their whole career is staked on the success of this film, they've got a winner. And generally, they do. That was all the problem with directors they had a few years ago, people got too big and didn't need Marvel so bad, and it caused problems.

 

[CaptainWagner]

Personally, I will forever stand by the decision to go straight to Justice League. There is no one "right" way to build a cinematic universe.

 

[Whatupman]

I've been thinking over this for a while now, and the conclusion I've come to is had WB planned this right from the start, and especially after the response from BvS, Wonder Woman should have been the first character in a shared universe. In hindsight this is how I would have done things:

JUN 2013: Wonder Woman
JUN 2014: Man of Steel
JUN 2015: Batman

So why this order? For starters the most exciting thing people reacted to in BvS was Wonder Woman. It's fair to assume then that a Wonder Woman solo film could have been made years ago, but WB was too hesitant to make it then.

"But why does this matter? Superman is bigger than Wonder Woman, it makes sense for him start the franchise, right? He's the most well known". Not so fast. If we also go further back a few years what did Iron Man bring to the genre? Freshness. Up until then the superhero market was essentially Batman, Superman, X-men and Spider-Man dominating to various degrees, with a smattering of lesser franchises here and there. Iron Man's succeeded in many ways but it being a totally new character well and truly would have played its part.

Wonder Woman I believe would have been the shot in the arm an infant DCEU would have needed to launch. It would have started the franchise off on a newer path, which would then be followed up by Superman 2 years later, Batman in 2016, and finally a DC Trinity movie in 2017.

"A Trinity movie? But what of Justice League?" Here's the thing with the WB, they have the advantage over Marvel in that they have three of the most famous icons in history. That means you don't need to do JL immediately. There was no real half way point for Marvel to get to Avengers, it was 4 solo films then, boom, giant team up movie, followed by a similar team up movie 3 years later. What was one of the chief issues with Age of Ultron? It felt familiar.

WB had the advantage where they could have used a Trinity film as a stepping stone to JL and increasing the number of new characters in the build up, resulting in a schedule like this:

JUN 2016: Trinity
APR 2017: Flash
NOV 2017: Wonder Woman 2
APR 2018: Aquaman
JUN 2018: Man of Steel 2
JUN 2019: Batman 2
NOV 2019: Green Lantern
JUN 2020: Justice League

It starts with a fresh face in Wonder Woman, continues with tried and true heroes in Superman and Batman with their own stories, culminating with the three meeting together for the first time 3 years later. That's the first build up to JL. You follow that up with an increase in films for new characters in Flash, Aquaman and Green Lantern mixing in with sequels for the other characters, and then hit the audience with JL after that.

I think it would've been the wrong choice to do a Trinity movie before Justice League. I think it would've dampened the excitement for Justice League. A big part to why there was such a huge excitement for The Avengers was because we were gonna see characters that we love interact for the first time. If Iron Man, Captain America and Thor, or Hulk, had already been in a movie together, The Avengers wouldn't have felt so special.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Personally, I will forever stand by the decision to go straight to Justice League. There is no one "right" way to build a cinematic universe.

Agreed. Batman and Superman are both easily well-known and popular enough that you can go straight to the teamups. We've had movies on these two for years. It isn't the same situation as Marvel where characters like Iron Man and Captain America had to be established first because the general audience didn't have much of an idea of who they were.

The problem is that once they did put Superman and Batman on-screen together, the movie was a godawful piece of crap that audiences soundly rejected. It is the execution that is killing the DCEU, far moreso than the overall planning.

The biggest mistake DC made in terms of their plans was scheduling JL so soon after BvS. That way if BvS was garbage, which turned out to be the case, they had no time to course correct and fix things for JL (by hiring a new director, etc.).

 

[Shikamaru]

Honestly, DC films wouldn't need to be as interconnected as the Marvel ones. Unlike Marvel, DC's characters were never meant to originally be together. DC was a company of a bunch of smaller companies who came together and created the DC universe we have today. So unlike Marvel, DC is practically all about pocket universes. There's actually very few non-ensemble Marvel properties that are large enough to be have their own pocketverse (Spider-Man, X-Men, the FF, Hulk).

 

[FunkMiller]

Honestly, DC films wouldn't need to be as interconnected as the Marvel ones. Unlike Marvel, DC's characters were never meant to originally be together. DC was a company of a bunch of smaller companies who came together and created the DC universe we have today. So unlike Marvel, DC is practically all about pocket universes. There's actually very few non-ensemble Marvel properties that are large enough to be have their own pocketverse (Spider-Man, X-Men, the FF, Hulk).

They should have all been kept seperate. The only real reason we have a half-assed DCU is because there is an MCU that's made lots of money.

DC/WB should have kept their properties seperate until some kind of multiverse crossover somewhere down the line.

 

[Erzengel]

Honestly, DC films wouldn't need to be as interconnected as the Marvel ones. Unlike Marvel, DC's characters were never meant to originally be together. DC was a company of a bunch of smaller companies who came together and created the DC universe we have today. So unlike Marvel, DC is practically all about pocket universes. There's actually very few non-ensemble Marvel properties that are large enough to be have their own pocketverse (Spider-Man, X-Men, the FF, Hulk).

The issue is and I can only speak for myself. I'm tired of seeing Batman, Superman and Spider-Man in their own pocket universes. How many Jokers, Luthors and Green Goblins are we going to see?

Seeing Spider-Man go up against the Avengers was probably one of my favorite moments in the genre of CBM.

I want to see Superman and Batman together.

The problem is doing it right.

 

[CaptainWagner]

They should have all been kept seperate. The only real reason we have a half-assed DCU is because there is an MCU that's made lots of money.

DC/WB should have kept their properties seperate until some kind of multiverse crossover somewhere down the line.

Personally, I can't comprehend why someone would want this...

 

[Shikamaru]

The issue is and I can only speak for myself. I'm tired of seeing Batman, Superman and Spider-Man in their own pocket universes. How many Jokers, Luthors and Green Goblins are we going to see?

Seeing Spider-Man go up against the Avengers was probably one of my favorite moments in the genre of CBM.

I want to see Superman and Batman together.

The problem is doing it right.

That would be true if all there is to these pocket universes are just the Joker, the Green Goblin and Lex Luthor. I can't speak for Superman but I know it's not true for Batman and Spider-Man. In the comics Green Goblin is barely there, it's just that when he's there it's always a big deal. Joker IS always there, but so are so many of the other villains. Movie-wise the same thing applies. We had one Joker and one GG per franchise while each new respective franchise aimed for using villains not used in the previous films (Catwoman in Rises being the only other exception). There's still a lot more room as far as Batman/Spider-Man villains go.

Also since each DC hero operates in their own city, it's also way harder to keep contriving reasons for these heroes to bump into one another.

 

[Erzengel]

And those 2 are exceptions because you can go a few movies without repeating but as you move forward, you have to be ready to reboot because of people just aging.

Which is why I think Spider-Man and Batman would do well as a regular TV series if budget was no issues.

 

[Shikamaru]

I think once you go the shared universe route, you won't ever do a complete reboot.

Granted WB might reboot their DC films eventually depending on how their other films turn out, but as far as an actually structured shared universe goes (which the current DCEU isn't), they won't do a complete reboot.

 

[Victarion]

It's not that clear which ideas Snyder actually had. And most of the great things about the movie didn't really come from him. They came from the source.

If getting it right means doing movies on the level of Marvel's, then i prefer them to get it wrong. MCU's product just doesn't excite me one bit. It's not the kind of film i truly respect. But neither is BvS. I wouldn't want to see Marvel attempt this, because what they're doing is already working very well for them. You can kind of look at their thing as the next step from what Nolan started; except instead of individual movies in a trilogy, you have these "mega movies", or Phases as Marvel calls them, comprising one great series of "mega movies" or Phases.

I don't like the cinematic universe approach. I don't like that things happen or don't happen in a story because of future films. Nolan's approach was the opposite, that's why those movies were so good. I actually felt intrigued by the story and there was always a sense that ANYTHING could happen. I like that and i don't get that from Marvel. The Marvel product works this way because i feel their movies are more like sitcoms. It's all about making a situation funny and interesting. It's all about the fireworks, not so much the narrative. The entire movie could just be RDJ eating pizza that it would still be entertaining. But i don't think you should try to make DC heroes work in the same way. DC should aim for something different.

Also, hire proven professionals. Don't hire people who have never made a really good movie before. Is this that difficult? Hire a good director, hire a good writer. What's so hard about this? You have billions and billions of dollars and you can't get a proven director to direct your Batman and Superman movies? This is just stupidity beyond belief. This is the kind of thing that even a ******ed chimpanzee would get it right. If you shot me in the head and turned me into a vegetable, i would still get it right. A 10 yo Justin Bieber fan would get it right. Paris Hilton would get it right.

Nolan's movies are still my gold standard for CBM's; they work nicely individually and together manage to tell a cohesive story. That's the only thing I'd want to see from his work carried over into DC'S new run of movies.

There wasn't anything, storywise, in BvS that I didn't like; it was all good for me. Its the technical aspects that really needed work, and I think bringing in guys like Black or Miller would go a long way toward fixing what needed fixing. A cinematic universe interested in challenging the notion of the superhero thing can be fun, really fun, but you need someone with better technical expertise than Snyder to make it happen.

And the right brand of humor is key. DC's approach, based on MoS and BvS would better lend itself to some good ol' gallows humor. Good witticism in response to situations that are seemingly hopeless.