Why Can't DC Get it right?

[The Overlord]

Kick-Ass is published by Icon or Marvel's division for creator owned titles. So the comics sales gets into Marvel's pocket, the characters are still owned by the writer.

Except did Marvel have anything to do with the film?

 

[Heretic]

Next year when Marvel has Thor and Cap and they have GL, hopefully WB/DC will start to realize its time to get characters other than Supes and Bats in live action. There isn't as much to get excited about this year when it comes to superhero movies.

Characters other than Batman and Supes?? How about Jonah hex and The Losers??

Oh wait...let me guess...they "don't count"...

 

[Octoberist]

they're failures but they don't reflect the DC Entertainment films. the problem with my argument is that WB has been a rollercoaster ride when it comes to quality, with so many false starts. But I'm confident that things will change. or i will eat my own hand.

 

[chiefchirpa]

Except did Marvel have anything to do with the film?

Film no, comics yes. That's why Marvel.com website is also promoting the film during the release dates, in hope that people will buy the comics/next Kick Ass series after seeing the movie.

 

[Docker2.0]

Well it did have the "Marv" logo in front of the film. Not Marvel but Marv.................which confused the heck out of me but............it's not about me.

 

[Heretic]

Marv is Matthew Vaughn's production company.

 

[Steve Holt]

Marv is a production company, nothing to do with Marvel

 

[chiefchirpa]

Well it did have the "Marv" logo in front of the film. Not Marvel but Marv.................which confused the heck out of me but............it's not about me.

Marv films is Matthew Vaughn (the director) production company.

 

[Docker2.0]

And I understand that but that logo looked a lot like Marvel, basically trying to trick the public. Compare the two and you will see where I'm coming from.

 

[The Overlord]

Film no, comics yes. That's why Marvel.com website is also promoting the film during the release dates, in hope that people will buy the comics/next Kick Ass series after seeing the movie.

The comics are irrelevant to this topic, we are talking about the films Marvel and DC had a hand in creating, whether they published the comics doesn't mean anything to this topic if they weren't involved with the film.

 

[MadVillainy]

And I understand that but that logo looked a lot like Marvel, basically trying to trick the public. Compare the two and you will see where I'm coming from.

lmao no the Marv logo in the film doesn't look like the Marvel logo they show in the front of their films

ANd I doubt they were thinking: (rubbing hands together) "Yes we can trick the audience by putting Marv in front of the film...Excellent"

I'm sure maybe 1% of people got confused by it

 

[Docker2.0]

That's not the one in front of the commercial sir.

 

[spider-neil]

chalk up another FAIL to DC with JH

 

[Jake Cassidy]

It doesn't matter. DC still has The Dark Knight. No Marvel movie has even come close to that. t:

 

[spider-neil]

It doesn't matter. DC still has The Dark Knight. No Marvel movie has even come close to that. t:

if you're talking money

SM3 - $890,871,626

TDK - $1,001,921,825

making a difference of - $111,050,199
(SM made more money than TDK overseas)

if we're talking ratings

SM2 - 94% rottentomato
TDK - 94% rottentomato
SM2 - 83 - metacritic
TDK - 82 - metacritic

I'd say that was coming pretty close.

 

[Docker2.0]

Wow! Good come back Neil!

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Kick-Ass is published by Icon or Marvel's division for creator owned titles. So the comics sales gets into Marvel's pocket, the characters are still owned by the writer.

Yeah, but I said Marvel doesn't see any of the film's profits; Millar does. That's why he chose a creator owned deal.

 

[MadVillainy]

That's not the one in front of the commercial sir.

Even the ones in the commericals didn't look like the Marvel logo. Its very unlikely that they were trying to trick the public

It doesn't matter. DC still has The Dark Knight. No Marvel movie has even come close to that. t:

You can't use that as a fallback for everything DC does wrong

Person 1: DC is respnsible of the bombing of a children's hospital
Person 2: But they have The Dark Knight so every thing is fine

if you're talking money

SM3 - $890,871,626

TDK - $1,001,921,825

making a difference of - $111,050,199
(SM made more money than TDK overseas)

if we're talking ratings

SM2 - 94% rottentomato
TDK - 94% rottentomato
SM2 - 83 - metacritic
TDK - 82 - metacritic

I'd say that was coming pretty close.

Nice.

I love TDK it literally is my favorite movie, but I find it funny that some people act like its the only superhero/comic film to be critically acclaimed/have a Oscar nominated performance/make alot of money

HAving one or 2 HUGE franchises, like Batman and to a lesser extent Superman, is great. But having 3 HUGE franchises is better

 

[spider-neil]

DC's big problem is they give their characters to directors that don't 'get' the character. I think the only time DC have got it right was with nolan and donner.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

DC's big problem is they give their characters to directors that don't 'get' the character. I think the only time DC have got it right was with nolan and donner.

DC's problem isn't that its stuff fails, it's that they get gunshy after it does. DC's average fails this past decade are way lower than Marvels, but DC goes to bat so few times that it looks worse. The only reason we are getting Supes before 2016 is that stupid lawsuit.


I mean, should BOP fail on tv have stopped Mercy Reef, Supergirl, or Green Arrow spin-off? It was Marvel, you bet they would have attempted at least one of them.

 

[Octoberist]

I just felt that the crew behind Jonah Hex didn't understand the property. At all. And history is repeating itself with the butchery (Wolfman) and over-the-topness that doesn't work (Wild Wild West).

Jonah Hex is an over the top franchise, but there's grit involved.

 

[spider-neil]

imagine 'fist full of dollars' but instead of clint eastwood its jonah hex. that's what I was expecting, I took one look at the trailer and thought 'no thanks'.

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah, I like the pulpy nature of 'fisful of dollars' THOUGH I PREFER Yojimbo. (If you didn't know, Fistful of Dollars was a slight remake of Akira Kurosawa's classic)

But Jonah Hex is more like High Plains Drifter, which has a weird, supernatural stance. IN that movie, Eastwood too plays a nameless character.

 

[Raiden]

edit

 

[Raiden]

DC's problem isn't that its stuff fails, it's that they get gunshy after it does. DC's average fails this past decade are way lower than Marvels, but DC goes to bat so few times that it looks worse. The only reason we are getting Supes before 2016 is that stupid lawsuit.


I mean, should BOP fail on tv have stopped Mercy Reef, Supergirl, or Green Arrow spin-off? It was Marvel, you bet they would have attempted at least one of them.

I think DC is catching up to Marvel's number of failures, despite their fewer production of comics/superheroes properties. DC already has two this year and that definitely increases their averages of bad films.