Marvel vs DC Movies-my thoughts on the past and future

Being in a car accident last week has given me a lot of time for reflection about these much-debated franchises and I wanted to offer my opinion/theories.

Marvel:
Let's start back in 2000. X-Men comes out. Well received. 2002: Spider-Man is released and one of the largest openings in history at the time (IIRC) By 2003 I know we had X2 and DareDevil. Maybe a few other films. Then we had the Elektra movie, the "Man-Thing", The Hulk, Ghost Rider and some Blade movies. And let's be honest: Most of these movies weren't very good. Fantastic 4? Ugh. It seems like Spider-Man 3 was really the breaking point. We had all these films that were the same family, but didn't exist in the same universe so it almost didn't matter how they handled them. 2008: Iron-Man arrives and is met with wide praise. Incredible Hulk was also good, but was kinda lost between IM and TDK at the time. But these two laid the groundwork for the shared universe. 2009 gave us Origins and that was pretty much it. 2010: Iron Man 2 comes out and believe it or not, I prefer this to the first one. I always thought IM was good, but a little boring. We're getting close to the Avengers now. In 2011 we got Thor and Captain America. 2012 brought the record-setting The Avengers; I thought this film was really not all it was cracked up to be. Loki and Hulk stole the show for me. Now we've got sequels to three main characters from that either out or coming out within a year and all leading up to Avengers 2: Age of Ultron. Marvel has done things right since '08. At least the properties they handle. I'm not really sure WTF anyone thought made Ghost Rider 2 a film worth making.

DC:

Preface: I love DC. I think their characters are so much better than Marvel's in almost every single way. Now they haven't really done anything right in my opinion. I know the Nolanverse movies are much loved (and hated) by groups of fans. They made tons of money and had some solid (at times) storytelling. The thing is it wasn't what the DCU needed to launch something similar to Marvel and that is what DC needs to do to keep up, IMO. They spent 8 years NOT setting up a universe. Then they spent even more time making crappy movies like Jonah Hex and GL..both of which had a great potential to be good movies. They have spent the last 6 years making some excellent animated films that are not afraid to tell the stories that they need to tell. I thought MOS was dreadful for a lot of non-fanboy reasons despite the fact I was very much looking forward to it when I walked into the theater. They've got to churn out a bunch of movies in the next 3 years to make a good product and I am afraid they will blow it with BvS in 2015. I just don't think it will work. Though I am excited about Affleck as Batman. I think they are in the early stages of setting up their universe, but I'm also afraid they're doing it incorrectly.

When it comes to Marvel vs. DC in general, especially today, I think it all boils down to this. Marvel has characters, DC has icons. With Marvel you can have a great line up of characters who aren't so hampered down by the fact that they're icons. They can make mistakes, open up to people you wouldn't expect, and actually care about what's going on in the world. DC feels that since their characters are iconic, they must conform to their iconic stature. Everyone must conform to the views of Batman and Superman, where as in the Marvel universe, not everyone conforms with what our heroes actually fight for, even when the heroes are amongst themselves. The recent "Man of Steel" is a good example of trying to give Superman his Iconic status by having Jor-El constantly tell Supes that he is humanity's light and he will enable them to do wondrous things, yada yada yada. In TDKR, Batman likes to point out that anyone can be a hero, despite the fact that his potential replacement at the end of the movie is just another caucasian male who also happens to be an orphan, just like Bruce.

So when it comes down to which universe wins my support and loyalty, Marvel wins (At least the Disney controlled movies). They took a not-well-known hero like IRON MAN (Heck, I didn't know anything about him) and rocketed him into stardom, and it didn't stop there. Disney made a Captain America movie that proved successful over seas, they made Thor a fun, non-melodramatic movie and they took the biggest gamble that Hollywood is not known for making. Giving the reigns of "The Avengers" to a filmmaker who's only previous theatrical movie was a certified flop. Now that doesn't mean all "Marvel" properties are equal. Disney/Marvel is taking a lot of risks in bringing the Marvel IP to the screen, where as Fox/Marvel is trying desperately to focus as much of their movies on the character of Wolverine as much as possible. Not only did they give him his own movie again (and let's be honest, ALL THE XMEN MOVIES (Except one) WERE WOLVERINE MOVIES), but they're also making him the main character in the sequel to "X-Men: First Class", a sequel to a movie that managed to be a great X-Men movie that only featured Wolverine in a non-essential 10 second cameo.

Here's another bit I like. DC's next film is a Batman/Superman film, where Ben Affleck has been cast as Batman. Marvel's next big movie is "Guardians of the Galaxy", where it features a cast where three of the four characters are aliens, and one of them is a raccoon who talks and acts as the teams weapons expert. Now compare that with what DC/Warner said about trying to bring Wonder Woman to the big screen.

"Wonder Woman is tricky."

Yes, yes. Wonder Woman, "THE" most iconic female super hero of all time who has been around for over 70 years, is tricky. An alien raccoon who can talk and handle heavy weapons is not. Do I dare mention that Guardians of the Galaxy has more main pure-blooded alien characters than any of the Star Trek movies?

Remains to be seen if Guardians will be successful though. As a comic book fan I have zero interest in seeing it and I have a feeling the general public may be the same. Hope I'm wrong. I will give it to Marvel for embracing the Disney formula of just enough action, comedy, and cuteness to draw the public in for their MCU movies so far. So maybe they can do it again.

coofunkcurly said:

Remains to be seen if Guardians will be successful though. As a comic book fan I have zero interest in seeing it and I have a feeling the general public may be the same. Hope I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

Naturally. I wanted Green Lantern to be successful and thanked the stars and heavens that it wasn't. But what's important here is that they're doing something different and unexpected. Batman/Superman is not different, even with the pair up. It feels like Warner Bros./DC feels that don't need a Justice League and they can live off of Batman and Superman alone.

Also, I think Marvel will do the first major female character centered movie before DC/Warner Bros. will.

Marvel makes fun, somewhat family friendly movies that are mostly true to their characters.

DC makes darker movies that aren't as family friendly that aren't as true to their characters.

Marvel's Movie Universe (MMU) has trumped anything DC has done so far. Add in X-Men First Class which, while outside the MMU might be the finest Marvel comic inspired movie yet (and it wasn't all that true to the characters). But if you consider the other X-Men movies (which were 'meh' at best - The Wolverine was a bit better), the Spider-Man films (loved Tobey, not the new guy), FF (reboot coming), Ghost Rider, Blade and the like (no thank you)... which might counter Green Lantern, Jonah Hex and going against popular opinion - the poor Nolan Batman movies (which had some great performances by Ledger, Oldman and even Eckhart and Hathaway).

Marvel has more going for it. Their comics have been much more popular the last decade or two... and their movies have been clearly superior. Can DC overtake them? I don't think so - they're just not gearing towards the more family friendly movies with some humor in it. Once the hype dies off, I think folks will get tired of too dark movies that are just bleak offering little hope.

I wouldnt really want DC to overtake them, a tie is good enough . They just need to look at their full arsenal of heroes instead of sticking with the 2 they usually use. I loved Mos and im looking for ward to batman/superman, but Aquaman, Wonder-woman and the flash are 3 heroes if done right that could have similar succes. Marvel started with Iron man which at that time was also only known to comic fans, same thing applies to thor and cap yet they had a plan and stuck with it till the end. Now Marvel is going to dish out more rather unknown (to the general public) heroes.

Flash would for example be a great character to make a movie from in which they can add action and comedy. They just need to find the right people for the job and that is in my opinion still the people involved in the comics (bruce timm & crew)

If DC wants to knock one out of the park they need to bring in Booster gold.

Marvel wasted most of their strongest women characters.

Monkey67 said:

Marvel wasted most of their strongest women characters.

Click to expand...

And DC is doing any better, especially in regards to "New 52" Wonder Woman?

• They changed her origin from being the daughter of the Amazons to the bast*** child of Zues. This is actually the origin of her sidekick Wonder Girl.
• She is now a mocking, and almost uncaring individual who favors random acts of violence at the slightest quips.
• She is completely male dependent as she has no female allies who fight along side her and the only female ally she has is a girl who is put in the damsel in distress more than once.
• The Amazons themselves, who were the good guys pre-New 52 and had some interesting characters of their own are now ALL portrayed as women who sleep with men, murder them and sell their male children off into slavery in literal hellish conditions for weapons and armor. They hate men, they condone child slavery, and they cannot make their own weapons or armor = improvement.
• Her Amazon training is literally depicted as inadequate since Issue #0 establishes how she spent her childhood training in secret with Ares which made her the more capable fighter amongst the Amazons.

And let's not forget the upcoming Superman/Wonder Woman comic that's coming out, which is a comic dedicated solely towards the relationship between Superman and Wonder Woman. Never mind the fact that in two different comics since New 52, Wonder Woman has been depicted as being Superman's unquestioning ally, saying things like "I will be whatever he wants me to be", and in the "New 52" Justice League, her label is literally "Superman's Lover". And when asked what this new comic hopes to accomplish, writer Tony Daniel had this to say...

Tony Daniel said:

"And maybe a book that has a little bit of romance in it, a little big of sex appeal, you know, something that would, for lack of a better example, that hits on the Twilight audience. You know, millions of people went to see those in the theaters because it has those kind of, you know, subject matter. The drama, the characterization with love triangles and forbidden love and things like that."

Click to expand...

"The Avengers" gave Black Widow her own character arc and scenes that saw the story told through her perspective, while DC wants to make Wonder Woman please the "Twilight" crowd. Also, Agent Carter has her own short.

...well, the new 52 also turned Superman into Spider-Man (outside the obvious super-powers).

Thought we were just talking movies? Haven't read any comic books in years but from what I heard both companies are kind of a mess in that department?

I grew up a DC fan above all. When I was a kid I felt most of the Marvel characters were too corny. Not stating that as fact. Just what my sense as a kid. Have liked their movies for the most part but my biggest issue with many of the movies (The Avengers and IM in particular) have been what I see is the constant need to add bad jokes and gags. I do see the value of some comedy in even the most serious of movies but it's like they take it too far. Just my tastes though.

coofunkcurly said:

Thought we were just talking movies? Haven't read any comic books in years but from what I heard both companies are kind of a mess in that department?

I grew up a DC fan above all. When I was a kid I felt most of the Marvel characters were too corny. Not stating that as fact. Just what my sense as a kid. Have liked their movies for the most part but my biggest issue with many of the movies (The Avengers and IM in particular) have been what I see is the constant need to add bad jokes and gags. I do see the value of some comedy in even the most serious of movies but it's like they take it too far. Just my tastes though.

Click to expand...

I have to put my two cents in about the comics. As a kid (in the 70's and 80's) I preferred Marvel comics. I thought DC characters were actually weaker and "cornier."

I started off reading both Marvel and DC but ended up preferring Marvel. I just got bored of DC. The world of DC comics seemed pure fantasy - sometimes to the point of ridiculousness. Marvel characters occupied a more realistic world where sci-fi was more operative than fantasy.

Marvel villains just seemed more plausible and often more morally complex and interesting. As a kid I was impressed that Doctor Doom, as "evil" as any villain, seemed actually to be a benevolent ruler of Latveria. I was impressed with tragic figures like the Silver Surfer in his solitude and always misunderstood by the people of Earth that he would defend. It was not unlike Spider-Man who was also hated by most of the public.

I remember a story in Shang-Chi (Master of Kung Fu) where he fights to rescue his kidnapped girlfriend and, in a bizarre twist, as he's beating the villain, the girlfriend intervenes because, as a hostage, she had actually fallen in love with her captor. She gives a tearful apology to the hero as she's protecting the injured villain in her arms. Shang-Chi walks away in defeat.

DC villains just seemed generally stereotypically evil - motivated to do evil things for the sake of evil.

It bothered me that many of Batman's villains distinguished themselves through the esthetics of their crimes, and that just felt insipid. The Riddler, for example, was always dumping clues to his crimes? And then is dumbfounded when someone applies less logic than it takes to solve a crossword puzzle to defeat him? What an awful contrivance.

Lex Luthor's entire legacy of evil traced back to losing his hair from Superboy putting out a fire? Even my 10 year old self was facepalming that character motive.

Bizarro world? Don't get me started on that one. Mister Mxyzptlk? Get him to say his name backwards? Really?

The Green Lantern's power was just Deus Ex Machina incarnate. And, if he was going to smash something, why did he need to make comically literal objects? e.g. big giant hammer?

I also couldn't get past the Green Arrow's boxing glove arrow. Seriously? The only reason why a knockout gloved punch has any power is because there's a fist inside of it with all the kinetic energy of a human body in motion. A boxing glove at the end of an arrow was just insipid beyond belief to my gradeschool brain. Conversely Hawkeye's comparable arrows were simply weighted and blunt at the end ... which is how you'd probably do in IRL. That's how I saw it.

In the Marvel Universe a magic-user is going to look like Dr. Strange or any one of his contemporaries. DC's idea of a magic-user would be like The Wizard who wears a stereotypical magician's outfit complete with top hat and cane... or have a name like Abra Kadabra. It just seemed so ... silly. On the other hand the whole mythos of Dr. Strange and Steve Ditko's conception of his magics was just infinitely more interesting and complex.

Lastly the artwork in Marvel comics just seemed generally more dynamic and engaging than in DC. I didn't know it at the time but early Marvel gave a lot more authority to the artist to do layouts. I'm told that at DC it was the writer who decided how to graphically panel the pages and the artist didn't have the same creative freedom. I really noticed the difference. Marvel fights were usually more impressive. Not to condemn all DC ... legendary artists like, Neil Adams, transcended everything to make great stuff whether he was working with Marvel or DC.

I'm not sure if it's true today but those are the impressions I had as a kid. This was all before Frank Miller turned out The Dark Knight Returns and made Batman great again. But by that time I was already familiar with Frank Miller through his work in Marvel comic's Daredevil. Marvel > DC for me.

Here's my take on it....whichever way you look at it, DC really only has two superstars in their lineup of Superheros. Batman and Superman. Even Green Lantern really isn't that popular...but Batman and Supes are Worldwide Icons.

Marvel, on the other hand, has a much wider toolset....Spiderman, Wolverine, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man. All of these characters are recognized the world over by billions of people.

Personally, I just feel that Marvel has more to work with, and they are willing to try things out, while DC is hesitant to really tread any new ground.

Crank729 said:

Marvel, on the other hand, has a much wider toolset....Spiderman, Wolverine, Captain America, Thor, Iron Man. All of these characters are recognized the world over by billions of people.

Click to expand...

Before the actual movies characters like thor, cap america and yes even iron man were about as popular as lets say Aquaman, green lantern etc from DC. Like said before, Marvel took those characters that were rather unknown to the general public and made them into one of the most popular heroes atm. While superman/batman are still the ultimate hero icons, if done right DC could do the same with their "lesser" characters.

Mektar said:

Before the actual movies characters like thor, cap america and yes even iron man were about as popular as lets say Aquaman, green lantern etc from DC. Like said before, Marvel took those characters that were rather unknown to the general public and made them into one of the most popular heroes atm. While superman/batman are still the ultimate hero icons, if done right DC could do the same with their "lesser" characters.

Click to expand...

Not at all.

While the popularity/recoginizability of the Cap and the like might be shadowed by Supes/Bats they are definitely not quite that far off the map. Sales figures prove that.

Thats all down to how marvel dealt with the movies tho. Before any of those movies were made the general public wasnt that well known about alot of other superheroes like the fans were. How many times ive seen that asked if thor was actually about the norse mythology rather then the marvel character. My point was that without their respective movies and proper build up of marvel, the general public (and thats what it is all about) would still not know much or know anything about those characters at all.

I would argue that characters like Iron Man, Thor, & Captain America weren't really all that unknown prior to their recent movies. They're staple Marvel characters that are, naturally, well known to comic book fans but not entirely unknown to the general public. Iron Man has had a cartoon series back in the 80s, and both Thor & Captain America have either had live action TV series &/or movies back in the late 70s/early 80s as well, granted that they're (now) rather obscure and I know the Cap TV show sucked but they definitely were well known enough, at least at the time, for them to get the TV/movie treatment in the past.

I dint say they were unknow period tho. I simply stated that before their actual movies you could put for example thor/cap (marvel) next to Wonder woman/Flash. But now due to marvel having actually release a (good) movie about them even the non-comic fan is well known with them. While you still have people think that batman/superman are all that dc has to offer.

Marvel has had its heroes on television as early as 1966. I remember that series (through reruns as I wasn't alive in '66) and it being a big hit with other kids in grade school.

The comic book Thor is now more well known than the Norse God. Spider-Man and Captain America is just as iconic as Supes as Bats (maybe just a hair behind).

...you can probably add The Hulk up there with Spidey and Cap being just as iconic. The Bixby television series cemented that to a lot of folks.

Jawafive said:

Marvel:
Let's start back in 2000. X-Men comes out. Well received. 2002: Spider-Man is released and one of the largest openings in history at the time (IIRC) By 2003 I know we had X2 and DareDevil. Maybe a few other films. Then we had the Elektra movie, the "Man-Thing", The Hulk, Ghost Rider and some Blade movies. And let's be honest: Most of these movies weren't very good. Fantastic 4? Ugh. It seems like Spider-Man 3 was really the breaking point. We had all these films that were the same family, but didn't exist in the same universe so it almost didn't matter how they handled them. 2008: Iron-Man arrives and is met with wide praise. Incredible Hulk was also good, but was kinda lost between IM and TDK at the time. But these two laid the groundwork for the shared universe. 2009 gave us Origins and that was pretty much it. 2010: Iron Man 2 comes out and believe it or not, I prefer this to the first one. I always thought IM was good, but a little boring. We're getting close to the Avengers now. In 2011 we got Thor and Captain America. 2012 brought the record-setting The Avengers; I thought this film was really not all it was cracked up to be. Loki and Hulk stole the show for me. Now we've got sequels to three main characters from that either out or coming out within a year and all leading up to Avengers 2: Age of Ultron. Marvel has done things right since '08. At least the properties they handle. I'm not really sure WTF anyone thought made Ghost Rider 2 a film worth making.

Click to expand...

Everything prior to Iron Man was put out by other studios (Fox and SONY). The only movies that Marvel had actual control over how they were made are the Iron Man films, Captain America, Thor and Avengers. The stinkers you noted (Ghost Rider 1 and 2, Fantastic Four, Spider-Man 3) were under the purview of other studios which is why they fall short.

Frankly, it's also why we're seeing things like the new Spiderman films and this new Fantastic Four reboot, that's being bandied about. They don't want to relinquish their hold on these potentially profitable franchises, despite the fact that they, more or less, don't know what to do with them most of the time. X3 is a great example of that. First Class was a great film (though a bit of a headache in terms of canon), and started to wash the nasty taste of X3 out of my mouth, but the more I hear/see of the production of DoFP, the more worried I get. A huge part of X3's downfall was the way they tried to cram every mutant they could into the film, and I can't help but see shades of that with every tweet that Singer sends out.