Could the DCEU version of universe building have worked?

I like the idea of doing Justice League first.
I think DC works better as a big universe from the get go--Marvel was using its second tier characters and they worked better for the expanding universe approach (though the movies are done poorly).

Overall--just too many damn superhero movies.

Who knows?

I suppose it could have worked. But I’m not sure if the solo movies would play out if JL were to be first.

The reason the MCU worked so well was because of the solo movies leading up to the ultimate team-up movie. DC could have done this better had they not done BvS so soon and give solo movies to Flash, Cyborg, Aquaman etc before they made JL.

Then again, they could use the reverse formula to benefit in some way, like you said they wouldn’t entirely copy MCU and if they can find a way to develop their characters after the big team-up movie.

Therefore, I voted yes, but with caution.

MCU were a little more cautious in their approach to what was an ambitious plan...and so they should have been when you consider the roster of characters they had in the first 5 films. Overall the DCEU films grossed more than the MCU first five (as well as costing a lot more), but that should have been expected, they played their big hands early - Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman and Joker - probably 4 of the 5 most famous Comic Book charaters in history in their first 3 films. The early risks and success MCU had, gave them the confidence, and established "brand" to allow them to build a cinematic universe and take even bigger risks - Guardians, Ant-Man, Doctor Strange etc.

The DCEU films may have been seen in the theatre by more people, but it doesn't mean those people like the films. That DVD/BluRay sales of individual MCU titles outstrip those of DCEU titles. This might show MCU has better rewatch value at least.

Whether concious or not, DCEU seemed to react to MCU by taking an opposite bigger and darker approach, as well rebooting characters seen many times before. I don't think they should have gone straight in with a JL film...they should have started with Wonder Woman or Flash, lay a foundation for re-introducing the big guns Superman and Batman, which was always going to be uphill task because we already had for many the quintessential Superman and Batman films. I think perhaps the MCU approach might have been a better idea.

I do think MCU have been excellent in their casting. DCEU hasn't been terrible. Affleck is a decent Bruce Wayne, Cavill a decent Superman...in fact generally it's been good (though I still struggle to remember who played the sad robot in Justice League). It's just MCU have been better - taking mostly recogniseable and/or respected screen actors who are not quite at carrying a blockbuster movie level and giving them a chance to front a major movie. Even Downey Jr was a risk, and it seems one worth taking. $500,000 for the first Iron Man film - he made Iron Man a popular draw, almost the backbone of the first couple of MCU phases at least...the cost may have risen but so have the returns. In comparison what did we get in return for a $20m Will Smith in Suicide Squad? I'm sure on the back of their Oscars Affleck and Leto cost a princely sum too.

Who knows, maybe opening with JL might have worked. It's not as if it hadn't been done before - X-Men managed to introduce a team and then have spin-offs. And maybe Snyder could have started with a multi hero comic book that might have worked - he did it before with a non-A-List cast, introducing lesser known characters, with Watchmen...for me better than anyone could have expected. But the tone that worked for that film maybe should have been avoided in the DCEU. I was OK with it in Man Of Steel...that was a new take on the character, but in a Batman heavy franchise maybe perhaps stear away from the darkness of Nolan's Batman films. MCU was almoat a breath of fresh air in that it was in the minority up til then in being a bit more lighter than CBMs of the previous few decades. The majority were darker, but the best of them had some humour and light in them - Hellboy, Kick-Ass, Super.

I think maybe the biggest problem DCEU is that they don't have a Fiege. Someone who knows the history of the characters, but also picks the right people for the job. Not all of DCEUs decisions have been terrible but some could have been better. The drafting in of Whedon on Justice League shows there was either no confidence in what Snyder was doing and took a chance to make something different, or just laziness (he did well with Avengers, he'll do the same on JL). And the ever changing roster of DCEU films shows there is really no big plan, or one they are confident in. Super is probably one of the darkest super hero films ever, but it has a sense of humour as well - MCU sees this and gives it's director Guardians Of The Galaxy - one of the most fun, popular and surprsingly successful MCU films. Watchmen is dark and brooding, good looking, relatively humourless...as is Sucker Punch which featured many CBM tropes and ideas (probably has the most superhero landings in one film) - DCEU lets it's director loose on it's franchise and they get dark, brooding, good looking, relatively humourless films...and the critics and a lot of the audience don't like them.

This reply was all over the place, sorry. Trying to write something down while trying to work is always a mistake, and got carried away.

Boils down to this...DCEU...a few hits, lots of misses, mediocre stewardship, some lofty ambitions, some weak execution, disappointing results. Maybe in hindsight a different "order" may have worked. Equally, maybe the same order of films with a different approach and/or personnel may have.