Advertisement

The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

This is the main board on The Outhouse, where Outhousers talk about everything. No topics are off limits, and it doesn't have to be about comics. All the topics from the other boards also show up in The Asylum, so you never have to leave1

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Logged in users see WAY LESS ADS, so why not register? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

Strict31
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 41969
Likes: 70 posts
Liked in: 167 posts
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:41 am
Title: Ain't enough space bitches


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Strict31 » Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:49 am

Draco x wrote:
Which is what I said before that the other problem was the storyline but given how many comicbook films Reynolds starred in that flopped, his casting didn't help much. As for DC/WB, what you said is true but that's part of the problem right there as if they keep only relying on the Bat franchise, that's going to be bad in the long run because at least Marvel doesn't keep relying on one particular character to keep carrying them successfully. I do believe that if WB/DC were run by more competent people they could pretty much show that it's not just about Batman or even Superman but sadly that won't happen anytime soon. Marvel pretty much has it covered in the super hero genre, so I was suggesting DC/WB look to other ones to try their luck in the long term.


I think you're still missing my point. Here is an example:

It might be interesting to try and cram a square-shaped block into a round-shaped hole, but experience has proven that the round-shaped block fits the round-shaped hole with far greater success. Additionally, a big-titty girl named Ilse rubs her titties on you every time you put the round block into the round hole.

Conversely, every time you try and put the square block into the round hole, Ilse freaks out, punches you in the dick and runs away screaming that you just tried to rape her right in the childhood.

After a few tries, you're going to realize the round block/round hole combination is the more sensible, more reliable and more profitable choice.

Marvel meanwhile has no round-shaped blocks. It's got triangle-shaped blocks and hexagon-shaped blocks, and nothing but round holes. That's because it sold all its round-shaped blocks years ago for the price of a hand job in the back of a cab, and it can't get those blocks back.

But what Marvel also has is a power-sander. And all this time, it has been diligently sanding down the edges on its blocks to make them round enough to fit into the round hole. And Ilse, as it so happens, is turned on by the sound of power-tools.
Image

"You must be proud, bold, pleasant, resolute,
And now and then stab, as occasion serves."


Edward II: Act 2 Scene 1, by Christopher Marlowe

Advertisement

Draco x
User avatar
FROGMAN
 
Posts: 8991
Likes: 1141 posts
Liked in: 324 posts
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:51 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Draco x » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:38 pm

Strict31 wrote:
I think you're still missing my point. Here is an example:

It might be interesting to try and cram a square-shaped block into a round-shaped hole, but experience has proven that the round-shaped block fits the round-shaped hole with far greater success. Additionally, a big-titty girl named Ilse rubs her titties on you every time you put the round block into the round hole.

Conversely, every time you try and put the square block into the round hole, Ilse freaks out, punches you in the dick and runs away screaming that you just tried to rape her right in the childhood.

After a few tries, you're going to realize the round block/round hole combination is the more sensible, more reliable and more profitable choice.

Marvel meanwhile has no round-shaped blocks. It's got triangle-shaped blocks and hexagon-shaped blocks, and nothing but round holes. That's because it sold all its round-shaped blocks years ago for the price of a hand job in the back of a cab, and it can't get those blocks back.

But what Marvel also has is a power-sander. And all this time, it has been diligently sanding down the edges on its blocks to make them round enough to fit into the round hole. And Ilse, as it so happens, is turned on by the sound of power-tools.


So you're basically saying that DC/WB can't change their tactics and learn anything then? As long as the company is run by people who believe that the Batman franchise is their be-all, end-all then sadly you are right.

Draco x
User avatar
FROGMAN
 
Posts: 8991
Likes: 1141 posts
Liked in: 324 posts
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:51 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Draco x » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:40 pm

Lord Simian wrote:You do realize that DC Comics has ZERO influence over what Warner Brothers does with the characters, right? DC doesnt decide the films WB makes, they're a sub company.

DC has as much to do with WB's movies as Marvel did with Monsters University.


Which is part of the problem as WB have no clue what to do with DC that doesn't involve Batman or Superman. We all know this very well, Sim.

Draco x
User avatar
FROGMAN
 
Posts: 8991
Likes: 1141 posts
Liked in: 324 posts
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:51 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Draco x » Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:41 pm

oogy wrote:None of those movies were very good, IMO.

Swamp Thing = terrible
Constantine = terrible
Watchmen = meh
Road to Perdition = forgettable
Red = meh
The Losers = forgettable


But at least they tried to different venues that didn't involve characters in funny costumes( With the exception of Watchmen of course).

Spektre
User avatar
Swedish Pinata of Death
 
Posts: 3725
Likes: 159 posts
Liked in: 192 posts
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:14 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Spektre » Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:01 pm

DC/WB hasn't put out a SuperHERO movie in years.
- Continuity is or it is not. There is no such thing as soft continuity.
- A character IS his continuity.
- Continuity is consistency of the characteristics of people, plot, objects, and places seen by the reader or viewer.

Strict31
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 41969
Likes: 70 posts
Liked in: 167 posts
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:41 am
Title: Ain't enough space bitches


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Strict31 » Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:13 pm

Draco x wrote:
So you're basically saying that DC/WB can't change their tactics and learn anything then? As long as the company is run by people who believe that the Batman franchise is their be-all, end-all then sadly you are right.



*sigh*

No, I'm saying that have no reason to change their tactics, because their tactics have worked for them. And what they've learned is that Batman puts cash in the bank.
Image

"You must be proud, bold, pleasant, resolute,
And now and then stab, as occasion serves."


Edward II: Act 2 Scene 1, by Christopher Marlowe

Draco x
User avatar
FROGMAN
 
Posts: 8991
Likes: 1141 posts
Liked in: 324 posts
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:51 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Draco x » Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:05 pm

Strict31 wrote:

*sigh*

No, I'm saying that have no reason to change their tactics, because their tactics have worked for them. And what they've learned is that Batman puts cash in the bank.


And what would happen if that no longer happens which has been my point for the get-go? Marvel on the other hand knows better than to rely on one franchise and I was suggesting that DC do the same.

Strict31
User avatar
YOU WILL NEED A NURSE
 
Posts: 41969
Likes: 70 posts
Liked in: 167 posts
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:41 am
Title: Ain't enough space bitches


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Strict31 » Sat Mar 15, 2014 6:28 pm

Draco x wrote:
And what would happen if that no longer happens which has been my point for the get-go? Marvel on the other hand knows better than to rely on one franchise and I was suggesting that DC do the same.


From your original post, it seems clear that your point has been "DC could do other genres and give Marvel a run for their money at the box office." (paraphrased)

My point has been "Sure, they could do other genres, but Batman and Superman are proven earners, so they have zero reason to change." (again, paraphrased)

You're now changing your point to "what if...?" And I can't debate "what if" because it is based wholly on speculation of things that haven't occurred.
Image

"You must be proud, bold, pleasant, resolute,
And now and then stab, as occasion serves."


Edward II: Act 2 Scene 1, by Christopher Marlowe

Grayson
User avatar
Outhouse Drafter
 
Posts: 8466
Likes: 554 posts
Liked in: 994 posts
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:34 am
Location: The Darkest Timeline
Title: The Intersect
Formerly: Sakie


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Grayson » Sat Mar 15, 2014 7:05 pm

Draco x wrote:I was discussing this with Herald and some others on several threads about DC movies and decided to make a thread out of it just now. I had said at various times that the one advantage that DC had over Marvel with movies is that they could go outside the super-hero genre that Marvel tends to focus on primarily. For example, we've had movies like The Losers, Red, Road To Perdition, A History Of Violence, Sgt. Bilko and a few others that didn't have any super-hero elements at all. I was thinking that if DC and WB didn't primarily rely on the Batman or Superman franchises or any other super heroes that they could do easily do other genres than Marvel could. For example I would love to see stuff like Sandman, Trillium, Gemini Blood, Cyberella, Rush City, Scooter, Transmetropolitan, Bloody Mary, Black Lamb, Black Hawks, Frankenstein: Agent Of SHADE and various others. I do theorize that if DC and Warner were to think along these lines and be very successful with this approach that Marvel would be in trouble.


:lol:

Anyone agree or not?


No. Warner Bros. track record when adapting DC properties that don't contain "Superman" or "Batman" doesn't support the numbers to suggest in any way that if they were to suddenly shift their focus to developing other DC properties outside of the superhero genre, that they would be successful enough to make Marvel worry. To put this in perspective, to date Marvel's least successful film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe was 2008's The Incredible Hulk which made just over $263,000,000 at the box office. Warner Bros. most successful non-Superman or Batman superhero genre film was the Green Lantern with a box office total of just below $220,000,000 and it's most successful non-superhero genre film was Constantine with a box office total of just below $231,000,000. Captain America: The Winter Soldier is projected to take in over $100,000,000 in it's opening weekend alone. I think that it's fair to say that at the present time, Marvel has nothing to worry about from Warner Bros. or DC even if they were to suddenly and dramatically shift the focus of their film line.
ImageImageImage

Draco x
User avatar
FROGMAN
 
Posts: 8991
Likes: 1141 posts
Liked in: 324 posts
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:51 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Draco x » Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:36 pm

Strict31 wrote:
From your original post, it seems clear that your point has been "DC could do other genres and give Marvel a run for their money at the box office." (paraphrased)

My point has been "Sure, they could do other genres, but Batman and Superman are proven earners, so they have zero reason to change." (again, paraphrased)

You're now changing your point to "what if...?" And I can't debate "what if" because it is based wholly on speculation of things that haven't occurred.


In my original post I should have implied that this would be a long term strategy so apparently that part was missed-if I failed to make that part clear that's my fault. Doing something outside of super-heroes would be a good idea for DC as Marvel already has them beat in that for the time being and even with the might of Batman and Superman. To me it's just business sense to not rely on just one successful product but to try and make others just as successful in the long term.
Last edited by Draco x on Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Draco x
User avatar
FROGMAN
 
Posts: 8991
Likes: 1141 posts
Liked in: 324 posts
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:51 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Draco x » Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:45 pm

Grayson wrote:
:lol:





No. Warner Bros. track record when adapting DC properties that don't contain "Superman" or "Batman" doesn't support the numbers to suggest in any way that if they were to suddenly shift their focus to developing other DC properties outside of the superhero genre, that they would be successful enough to make Marvel worry. To put this in perspective, to date Marvel's least successful film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe was 2008's The Incredible Hulk which made just over $263,000,000 at the box office. Warner Bros. most successful non-Superman or Batman superhero genre film was the Green Lantern with a box office total of just below $220,000,000 and it's most successful non-superhero genre film was Constantine with a box office total of just below $231,000,000. Captain America: The Winter Soldier is projected to take in over $100,000,000 in it's opening weekend alone. I think that it's fair to say that at the present time, Marvel has nothing to worry about from Warner Bros. or DC even if they were to suddenly and dramatically shift the focus of their film line.



I see what you're saying and all but I can easily bring up the first 2 Captain America films that predated the one with Chris Evans. Both of those movies were just bad and very few people thought that a third Captain America film would ever be successful along with Thor or Blade-however we were all proven wrong. For the most part it takes good writing, good marketing, good directing and good acting for a film to work. I do agree it won't be an overnight success plan and that Marvel has the advantage due to years of good marketing strategy, but I wouldn't be so quick to say that DC/WB can't be capable of shifting strategies. Whether or not they will actually do it is one thing but I am just offering ideas. I should have said this idea was going to be a long term strategy which I forgot to mention in my first post, so my bad.

syxxpakk
User avatar
Wrasslin' Fan
 
Posts: 12625
Likes: 49 posts
Liked in: 111 posts
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:13 pm
Title: The Wrasslin' Fan


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby syxxpakk » Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:48 am

Draco x wrote:Doing something outside of super-heroes would be a good idea for DC as Marvel already has them beat in that for the time being and even with the might of Batman and Superman.


What non-superhero movies has Marvel done?
Image

When you're as good as Chael, you can only call out people worse than you.


@syxxpakk on the Twitter.

syxxpakk
User avatar
Wrasslin' Fan
 
Posts: 12625
Likes: 49 posts
Liked in: 111 posts
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:13 pm
Title: The Wrasslin' Fan


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby syxxpakk » Sun Mar 16, 2014 11:51 am

So if I'm to understand this, Draco is saying they should do movies like The Losers in addition to Superman/Batman-movies?
Image

When you're as good as Chael, you can only call out people worse than you.


@syxxpakk on the Twitter.

PDH
penile prisoner
 
Posts: 7214
Likes: 34 posts
Liked in: 65 posts
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 11:10 am


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby PDH » Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:34 pm

Lord Simian wrote:I love Transmet. I reread the series every few months. I weep that Patrick Stewart was unable to make his animated Transmet web series.

Transmet would never succeed as a film. It would be terrible. Anyone who claims not to see that fact is lying.


I honestly think it could work.

I mean, the interesting thing about the comic is how kind of...archetypal it is, if you know what I mean. The City is just 'The City.' It's not a particular place in the real world. The Smiler is the Platonic form of all politicians. He is literally just a smile with a nervous system, a complete nihilist with no principles of his own who will do whatever he has to do to gain and keep power. Spider is just the ideal of a good journalist. No real life journalists are actually like that but that is how they should be.

Ellis just distilled everything to its purest form and then threw them at each other. So, it wouldn't take much effort to get to the essence of the story. You could cut quite a lot of material to get it ship-shape for Hollywood without sinking the basic premise. I don't think you'd need to make anywhere near the sort of changes that they had to make to Red, and that just about worked. Plus, Ellis is not Alan Moore. He's pretty cool with other people using his properties.

I think everyone can get the basic themes of Transmet, they're pretty universal (and totally relevant to the modern world). It's about The Truth and everything that conspires against it.

Am I missing something?

Grayson
User avatar
Outhouse Drafter
 
Posts: 8466
Likes: 554 posts
Liked in: 994 posts
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:34 am
Location: The Darkest Timeline
Title: The Intersect
Formerly: Sakie


Re: The Movie Advantage DC Might Have Over Marvel

Postby Grayson » Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:49 pm

Draco x wrote:I see what you're saying and all but I can easily bring up the first 2 Captain America films that predated the one with Chris Evans. Both of those movies were just bad and very few people thought that a third Captain America film would ever be successful along with Thor or Blade-however we were all proven wrong. For the most part it takes good writing, good marketing, good directing and good acting for a film to work. I do agree it won't be an overnight success plan and that Marvel has the advantage due to years of good marketing strategy, but I wouldn't be so quick to say that DC/WB can't be capable of shifting strategies. Whether or not they will actually do it is one thing but I am just offering ideas. I should have said this idea was going to be a long term strategy which I forgot to mention in my first post, so my bad.


You could bring up the previous Captain America films but they wouldn't help your case any because all of the previous Captain America films were produced by companies outside of Marvel Studios. Since Marvel Studios began producing films based on their properties, they have been met with nothing but success. As I pointed out, their least successful movie, which was still a financial success, made more money than Warner Bros. most successful non-Superman or Batman related DC property films. What's interesting to note is that Marvel Studios didn't take the reigns of their film properties they control until 2008 while, with the exception of only a small handful of films, Warner Bros. or one of their subsidiaries has been in control of the entire DC catalogue since 1978. They had a 40 year head start on Marvel and they have done virtually nothing with it! Warner Bros. hasn't shown any signs that they have any intentions of making this dramatic shift in their strategy to adapt their DC properties and as I pointed out previously, even if they did they don't have the track record to support the theory that you are making. Is it possible? Sure. Is it plausible? Absolutely not.

So, your original proposal was that if Warner Bros. were to stop concentrating on their DC superhero franchise and start concentrating on adapting other non-superhero DC properties, that they could potentially become successful enough in their endeavors to cause trouble for Marvel. You followed that proposal by asking us if we agree or disagree. I disagreed and I believe that I have sufficiently provided you with enough evidence to explain why I don't believe that your proposal would be as successful as you believe that it would be.

Simply put, Marvel established a brand by believing in their properties, taking risks, and producing high quality movies. Warner Bros. only believes in 2 of their DC properties, plays it safe, and when they go out of a limb, produce campy schlock films. Warner Bros. doesn't view their comic book properties in the same way that Marvel Studios does and it's evident in their final product.
ImageImageImage

leave a comment with facebook

PreviousNext

Return to The Asylum



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 41 guests

Advertisement