DC Comics Cinematic Universe (2013 - present)

1195196197199201

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    The only movie I liked of his was FURY. Everything else he's made leads me to believe I wouldn't like his cut of SUICIDE SQUAD. If I were to watch it it's only out of curiosity, because I like seeing different cuts of movies. Pretty much like Snyder's JL, which I watched once and have no desire to see it again.
  • Posts: 787
    End Of Watch is Ayers best film.It’s one of the best cop movies ever made.

    And I love the tone of Snyder DC films.It’s welcome change of pace from the kiddie friendly,sit comish vibe of most MCU films.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    The reason why Marvel is so successful with that tone is because comic books are ultimately kiddie stuff. It's all ridiculous and fantastical. When DC treats the material so deadly serious with a straight face, it's like the joke flew right over its head. Even Nolan was smart enough to know that he needed to bring some levity to his Batman films.

    The closest DC has to something as successful as the MCU is Bruce Timm's DC Animated Universe. That got the tone PERFECT, and in a lot of ways does it even better than Marvel.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited August 10 Posts: 4,632
    I get what you're saying @MakeshiftPython, but despite the levity you suggest, Nolan's trilogy was pretty dark, and let's also not forget how Joker was a billion-dollar picture. Also, the interest levels in Reeves' upcoming The Batman seem to suggest it could face the same success, even if somewhat affected by the pandemic.

    I think overall, when it comes to DC, most of their success comes from the Batman character/universe mainly, in whatever context. It also explains why the new upcoming Flash movie seems more like a Batman movie than anything else.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    I get what you're saying @MakeshiftPython, but despite the levity you suggest, Nolan's trilogy was pretty dark, and let's also not forget how Joker was a billion-dollar picture. Also, the interest levels in Reeves' upcoming The Batman seem to suggest it could face the same success, even if somewhat affected by the pandemic.

    Nolan's trilogy was appropriately dark, but it wasn't aggressively dour like Snyder's films. That's the big difference.
    I think overall, when it comes to DC, most of their success comes from the Batman character/universe mainly, in whatever context. It also explains why the new upcoming Flash movie seems more like a Batman movie than anything else.

    I'm sure it'll very much be a Flash film first once the marketing machine really kicks into high gear with trailers, etc. Trying to fit other properties in the same tone as Nolan's was definitely something WB did a decade ago. However, AQUAMAN proved that didn't have to be the case. That movie was big, colorful, silly, and FUN, and is the only DCEU film to make a billion dollars so far. So I definitely think the idea that all DC films should have the same tone as Batman is a falsehood.

    Hopefully whenever Superman gets another film, they'll return to the more fun and adventurous tone of the traditional depiction of Superman. I'm not just talking Chris Reeve version, but what we saw throughout history with John Byrne's reboot in the 80s, Bruce Timm's animated show in the 90s, and All Star Superman in the 2000s.

    People do love that bright and optimistic version of that character, it's just that WB has never truly given us that kind of film for a VERY long time now. SUPERMAN RETURNS was too glum and dour which is why even Donner fans like me can't stand it. And then there's MAN OF STEEL, which I think we've talked about enough at this point.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited August 10 Posts: 4,632
    Oh, I'm not saying they should all fit the same "darker" tone, I'm just saying that I don't think the darker tone is something that works against them, especially in comparison to Marvel. Also, I'm not the biggest fan of the DCEU myself, with The Suicide Squad being the only one so far I can say I thoroughly enjoyed, but I do think its situation is incredibly complicated and beyond whatever comprehension we can make.

    All I'll say is that I personally like it when they take comic books seriously and try to adapt them to the screen in a way that makes them not only feel fresh and cinematic, but feel like the comic book brought to life.

    It's the main reason I personally really enjoyed The Suicide Squad, and why The Batman feels like the Batman adaptation I've been waiting for. As for Superman and the other Justice League members, I've never really got into those characters or comics so I can't really say what would work for those properties going forward. The Flash is gonna be an interesting experiment that's for sure.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 3,494
    Gunn’s TSS overall domestic gross it’s gonna be lower than SS opening DAY back in 2016.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    Oh well. At least we got a good movie.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 3,494
    I’m not gonna see the Gunn Squad but I’m pretty sure it’s a far better job than the abysmal 2016 Studio Squad.

    Anyway 81% Friday to Friday drop for TSS. I believe HBO Max is killing the simultaneous release’s legs in a way Disney+ Premier Access isn’t.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    Given they don’t charge $30 for the film, yeah, I can imagine that hurts TSS in a big way.

    DUNE is absolutely screwed.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 3,494
    Yeah. I really don’t understand this strategy.
  • Posts: 787
    The reason why Marvel is so successful with that tone is because comic books are ultimately kiddie stuff. It's all ridiculous and fantastical. When DC treats the material so deadly serious with a straight face, it's like the joke flew right over its head. Even Nolan was smart enough to know that he needed to bring some levity to his Batman films.

    The closest DC has to something as successful as the MCU is Bruce Timm's DC Animated Universe. That got the tone PERFECT, and in a lot of ways does it even better than Marvel.

    To say that comic books are “ ultimately kiddie stuff “ is ridiculous.It’s another form of telling stories.Are you saying famous comic books like Watchmen,V for Vendetta, and The Dark Knight Returns are kiddie stuff? Come on!

    Even some of Marvels output tends to skew older.I’m glad Daredevil got made at Netflix as that character demands a darker more mature tone than what the Marvel Comedy Universe tends to put out.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,834
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    The reason why Marvel is so successful with that tone is because comic books are ultimately kiddie stuff. It's all ridiculous and fantastical. When DC treats the material so deadly serious with a straight face, it's like the joke flew right over its head. Even Nolan was smart enough to know that he needed to bring some levity to his Batman films.

    The closest DC has to something as successful as the MCU is Bruce Timm's DC Animated Universe. That got the tone PERFECT, and in a lot of ways does it even better than Marvel.

    To say that comic books are “ ultimately kiddie stuff “ is ridiculous.It’s another form of telling stories.Are you saying famous comic books like Watchmen,V for Vendetta, and The Dark Knight Returns are kiddie stuff? Come on!

    Even some of Marvels output tends to skew older.I’m glad Daredevil got made at Netflix as that character demands a darker more mature tone than what the Marvel Comedy Universe tends to put out.

    Comics aren't just for kids, nor are they just for the people who presume their personal tastes are "mature". Comics have a large audience, on both ends of the spectrum.

    Also, "Marvel Comedy Universe"? Creative. One thing the MCU doesn't do as often as DC is crap on the competition while losing millions of dollars at the box office.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 6,470
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Marvel Comedy Universe

    You were doing so well until this.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    The reason why Marvel is so successful with that tone is because comic books are ultimately kiddie stuff. It's all ridiculous and fantastical. When DC treats the material so deadly serious with a straight face, it's like the joke flew right over its head. Even Nolan was smart enough to know that he needed to bring some levity to his Batman films.

    The closest DC has to something as successful as the MCU is Bruce Timm's DC Animated Universe. That got the tone PERFECT, and in a lot of ways does it even better than Marvel.

    To say that comic books are “ ultimately kiddie stuff “ is ridiculous.It’s another form of telling stories.Are you saying famous comic books like Watchmen,V for Vendetta, and The Dark Knight Returns are kiddie stuff? Come on!

    They’re exceptions, not the rule.

    Also, why would you bother making a cinematic universe to compete with Marvel’s but only target it towards mature audiences? That’s why BvS didn’t do as well as WB wanted, and why even the four hour R rated Snyder Cut didn’t break HBO Max records. Snyder’s films is for a niche audience, not a broad audience. WB realized that and that’s why Snyder has not been brought back to “restore” his vision on the rest of the cinematic universe.

    But I’ll give WB credit that they didn’t totally shelve R rated properties. They still went onto green lit JOKER, BIRDS OF PREY, and THE SUICIDE SQUAD, but with an understanding that they’re exceptional films given to mature audiences, while the bigger tentpole titles like AQUAMAN, SHAZAAM, WONDER WOMAN, and THE FLASH are going to keep aiming for broader audiences. That’s a given.

    It’s just too bad Cavill is never going to be given his solo Superman sequel. I wish WB had more confidence in Superman than they’ve ever shown.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,404
    I just wish they would make more superhero films for kids: I find it bizarre that they're almost all rated 12 or so when you have loads of primary school kids wearing backpacks with Iron Man on etc.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    Likewise, I’d love to see a mature MCU entry, and it looks like we actually get that with DEADPOOL 3.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,404
    I feel like there's quite a lot of those: the Infinity War Avenger films were probably aimed at teenagers or so. It's only really Ant Man and Spider Man which under 10s can watch.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    Is it? I mean, I was 8 years old when first discovered the Indiana Jones films. They scared me, but I LOVED that about them. I’d say most of Marvel is on that same kind of level. It’s just at the point where adults can enjoy as much as kids.

    Whereas I imagine most kids would get bored of Snyder’s Justice League. But then again it’s rated R and Snyder himself said it’s “for grown ups”, so whatevs.
  • Posts: 787
    1983- Superman 3 is released.Critical reaction: “ What’s with all the stupid childish jokes? Why can’t they take the character of Superman seriously? “

    2013- Man Of Steel is released.Critical reaction: “ Where are the jokes? Why are they taking Superman so seriously? “
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    I agree both those films each veer waaaayyy too much onto the opposite ends of the spectrum.

    Only the first film by Donner got the balance just right as far as Superman movies are concerned.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,834
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    1983- Superman 3 is released.Critical reaction: “ What’s with all the stupid childish jokes? Why can’t they take the character of Superman seriously? “

    2013- Man Of Steel is released.Critical reaction: “ Where are the jokes? Why are they taking Superman so seriously? “

    Very different critics and audiences in extremely different time periods. There's little to no real comparison here, save for the fact that the two films are on different extremes of the same spectrum.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 8,404
    I just watched WW84: it's an odd one, isn't it? It starts off incredibly strong, and I think it really feels like a Donner Superman film at the opening. It has a really good story too, it all holds together really well and has good central characters. But it gets slacker and slacker as it goes on: it if were a Donner Superman film it would be about 45 mins shorter- why does it take so long to say everything? And then it does fall apart a bit at the end. Not as much as the first WW film which I can't actually remember much about the ending, but it's still a bit of a mess. I think I might even blame the editor more than the director: I can think of many other films which are in so clear need of tightening up.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Enemy of the state
    Posts: 41,613
    I felt WW84 was more like Superman IV.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython "I want you looking FABULOUS."
    Posts: 4,739
    It felt more like Richard Lester Superman by the way it was more light and jokey compared to the first film. Kinda suitable, since those were also in the 80s.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited September 4 Posts: 8,404
    I felt WW84 was more like Superman IV.

    All of the very obvious England locations doubling for the US made it feel that way at times! :D

    I did prefer the lighter tone of this one.

    Gadot is the closest thing we have to Chris Reeve at the moment I’d say though. Charismatic, born to play the role of an innocent, idealistic superhero.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,756
    mtm wrote: »
    I felt WW84 was more like Superman IV.

    All of the very obvious England locations doubling for the US made it feel that way at times! :D

    I did prefer the lighter tone of this one.

    I felt the film to be too light in tone, especially compared to its predecessor. In fact, I was astonished by how little Diana gets to use her lasso, shield and sword. I'm fine with a film that tones down the violence and tries to manage its conflicts with a touch of pacifism, but this is a film in which the hero talks the villain into defeat. That is original for sure, but it's also extremely lame. And the whole subplot revolving around Chris Pine's character of Steve Trevor is just weird. I get that they wanted Pine back: we all loved him in that first film. But they did nothing with him, nothing that's useful, likeable or engaging. In fact, think one step beyond what's on-screen, and there's something really off-putting about how she treats him (and his avatar) in this story.
    mtm wrote: »
    Gadot is the closest thing we have to Chris Reeve at the moment I’d say though. Charismatic, born to play the role of an innocent, idealistic superhero.

    This I can certainly agree with. Gal Gadot is a gift from the heavens in the DC universe.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 6,063
    I felt WW84 was more like Superman IV.

    Yes!

    As a lover of the first film I was so disappointed in this film; it was so incredibly bad. One of the biggest misfires was the awkward plot device used to bring back Chris Pine. His character died, they should have moved on.

  • Posts: 15,577
    WW1984 is god dam awful and utter cringe. WW is made to look like a complete fool.
Sign In or Register to comment.