|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 21, 2017 18:30:24 GMT
www.indiewire.com/2017/06/wonder-woman-patty-jenkins-record-breaking-superhero-1201837268/#comment-1213908
MOS 291 domestic 668 world, BVS 330 domestic 873 world, Suicide Squad 325 domestic 745 world not to mention Wonder Woman
How is that a losing streak?
Those numbers are actually right in the same neighborhood as all other comic book movies considered successful. If a Marvel movie made 291 domestic everyone would be saying "See? Success!" But when its DC they say "it had bad reviews".
And before anyone says, it I know that money doesn't equal quality, but even that is arguable too because I, and a lot of other people, liked the DCCU movies. So... |
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Jun 21, 2017 18:34:12 GMT
www.indiewire.com/2017/06/wonder-woman-patty-jenkins-record-breaking-superhero-1201837268/#comment-1213908
MOS 291 domestic 668 world, BVS 330 domestic 873 world, Suicide Squad 325 domestic 745 world not to mention Wonder Woman
How is that a losing streak?
Those numbers are actually right in the same neighborhood as all other comic book movies considered successful. If a Marvel movie made 291 domestic everyone would be saying "See? Success!" But when its DC they say "it had bad reviews".
And before anyone says, it I know that money doesn't equal quality, but even that is arguable too because I, and a lot of other people, liked the DCCU movies. So... Really? It kind of seems like you don't. |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 21, 2017 18:36:45 GMT
Because it all still hangs on Justice League being a critical success, and grossing that almighty billion dollar total if possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 21, 2017 18:49:11 GMT
www.indiewire.com/2017/06/wonder-woman-patty-jenkins-record-breaking-superhero-1201837268/#comment-1213908
MOS 291 domestic 668 world, BVS 330 domestic 873 world, Suicide Squad 325 domestic 745 world not to mention Wonder Woman
How is that a losing streak?
Those numbers are actually right in the same neighborhood as all other comic book movies considered successful. If a Marvel movie made 291 domestic everyone would be saying "See? Success!" But when its DC they say "it had bad reviews".
And before anyone says, it I know that money doesn't equal quality, but even that is arguable too because I, and a lot of other people, liked the DCCU movies. So... Really? It kind of seems like you don't. That's why I wrote: ...but even that is arguable too because I, and a lot of other people, liked the DCCU movies. So... Which you apparently didn't continue on to read. |
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Jun 23, 2017 8:16:39 GMT
It makes them feel better about MCU
|
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Jun 23, 2017 9:42:38 GMT
what is this "DCCU" you speak of?
|
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Jun 23, 2017 10:39:51 GMT
Firstly, whether right or wrong, they will always be judged against the MCU franchise. MCU kicked off the whole extended universe thing some years before DC and were successful. To many it looked like DC were trying to emulate Marvel.
Secondly the first 4 DC films have featured their 4 biggest/most famous characters - Batman, Superman, The Joker and Wonder Woman...it was expected that they would perform better than they did (though WW has done very well so far). If you did a chart of worldwide BO for the MCU and DCEU combined BvS comes in at 5...$200m short of 4th place, and Suicide Squad at 8.
Doesn't look so bad except look at the Marvel roster - Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Captain America, Hulk, Guardians Of The Galaxy, Doctor Strange etc With the exception of maybe Cap America and Hulk, none of these were A-List (or even B-List) Marvel characters. Yet an Iron Man film can trounce a film featuring DCs three most famous characters! Man Of Steel - the most famous comic book character of all time could not gross more than Guardians Of The Galaxy or Doctor Strange!
And the reason for that may be the biggest reason why they are often considered a failure....with the exception of WW, DC films have generally been poorly received. Bad reviews, some disappointed audiences, bad word of mouth (or whatever the internet equivalent is) - they are generally not considered great films.
DC have put their biggest properties on screen, soon after the massive success of the Nolan/Batman films, and a lot more was expected
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 23, 2017 15:00:48 GMT
Firstly, whether right or wrong, they will always be judged against the MCU franchise. MCU kicked off the whole extended universe thing some years before DC and were successful. To many it looked like DC were trying to emulate Marvel. Secondly the first 4 DC films have featured their 4 biggest/most famous characters - Batman, Superman, The Joker and Wonder Woman...it was expected that they would perform better than they did (though WW has done very well so far). If you did a chart of worldwide BO for the MCU and DCEU combined BvS comes in at 5...$200m short of 4th place, and Suicide Squad at 8. Doesn't look so bad except look at the Marvel roster - Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Captain America, Hulk, Guardians Of The Galaxy, Doctor Strange etc With the exception of maybe Cap America and Hulk, none of these were A-List (or even B-List) Marvel characters. Yet an Iron Man film can trounce a film featuring DCs three most famous characters! Man Of Steel - the most famous comic book character of all time could not gross more than Guardians Of The Galaxy or Doctor Strange! And the reason for that may be the biggest reason why they are often considered a failure....with the exception of WW, DC films have generally been poorly received. Bad reviews, some disappointed audiences, bad word of mouth (or whatever the internet equivalent is) - they are generally not considered great films. DC have put their biggest properties on screen, soon after the massive success of the Nolan/Batman films, and a lot more was expected I understand your argument. I even acknowledge the truth in it. But there are advantages that Marvel has had that DC did/does not, which makes it seem like Marvel is just plain old better, when in fact DC competitively speaking is doing just as well. A) They came out as a shared universe of movies first. So everyone thinks that anything that comes after is just copying from them. I give credit where credit is due and acknowledge that Marvel had the balls to do it first and they did it in a way that was good and successful. They beat DC to that particular punch. But lets be honest, DC was always going to do that too, It was just a matter of time. An interconnected universe of movies just makes sense for super hero movies. B) There were, and continue to be, OTHER companies doing Marvel character movies Spiderman, XMen, Fantastic Four, Hulk, etc. (Sony, Fox, etc) giving the impression that are more Marvel properties in the movies. DC has always only had one movie studio putting them out. C) There have only been 3 DCCU movies, not counting Wonder Woman. By 3 movies in the MCCU it wasn't so clear they were all going to be successful either. Lets remember, Hulk and Thor were not huge Iron Man 1 hits. D) Zack Snyder, not the best director in the world. If Louis Letterier (Hulk) had directed most of the Marvel movies at that point it might not have seemed like the Marvel movies were greatly directed either.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 24, 2017 8:20:49 GMT
A) They came out as a shared universe of movies first. So everyone thinks that anything that comes after is just copying from them. You made some excellent and valid points in this thread. But I would just point out that: 1st, Marvel didn't come out with a shared universe of movies first. There were shared universe of movies long before MCU. There was a King Kong vs Godzilla movie in 1962 and Freddy vs Jason in 2003, long before MCU. 2nd, Marvel didn't even come out with the first shared universe of superhero movies. DC did that first in 1984. Then Fox did it with Daredevil and Elektra in 2003 and 2005. Those may not have been as good as the shared universes like the DCEU today, but the fact remains that those were still shared universes and existed before MCU did. MCU taking credit for creating the 1st shared universe of CBMs is as fraudulent as Bob Kane taking sole credit for the creation of Batman. C) There have only been 3 DCCU movies, not counting Wonder Woman. By 3 movies in the MCCU it wasn't so clear they were all going to be successful either. Lets remember, Hulk and Thor were not huge Iron Man 1 hits. That's true. But MCU fans don't like to look at facts, which is why they cling to the fraudulent claim that MCU created the 1st shared universe of CBMs. |
|
|
|
Post by ghostintheshell on Jun 24, 2017 8:41:39 GMT
what is this "DCCU" you speak of? believe it's called DCEU. Doesn't make any difference, it still sucks anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Jun 24, 2017 11:19:28 GMT
Firstly, whether right or wrong, they will always be judged against the MCU franchise. MCU kicked off the whole extended universe thing some years before DC and were successful. To many it looked like DC were trying to emulate Marvel. Secondly the first 4 DC films have featured their 4 biggest/most famous characters - Batman, Superman, The Joker and Wonder Woman...it was expected that they would perform better than they did (though WW has done very well so far). If you did a chart of worldwide BO for the MCU and DCEU combined BvS comes in at 5...$200m short of 4th place, and Suicide Squad at 8. Doesn't look so bad except look at the Marvel roster - Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, Captain America, Hulk, Guardians Of The Galaxy, Doctor Strange etc With the exception of maybe Cap America and Hulk, none of these were A-List (or even B-List) Marvel characters. Yet an Iron Man film can trounce a film featuring DCs three most famous characters! Man Of Steel - the most famous comic book character of all time could not gross more than Guardians Of The Galaxy or Doctor Strange! And the reason for that may be the biggest reason why they are often considered a failure....with the exception of WW, DC films have generally been poorly received. Bad reviews, some disappointed audiences, bad word of mouth (or whatever the internet equivalent is) - they are generally not considered great films. DC have put their biggest properties on screen, soon after the massive success of the Nolan/Batman films, and a lot more was expected
C) There have only been 3 DCCU movies, not counting Wonder Woman. By 3 movies in the MCCU it wasn't so clear they were all going to be successful either. Lets remember, Hulk and Thor were not huge Iron Man 1 hits.
But in three films MCU had played their 4 MVPs - better films and better box office was expected. |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 26, 2017 14:39:34 GMT
what is this "DCCU" you speak of? believe it's called DCEU. Doesn't make any difference, it still sucks anyway. I guess it IS called DC EU, though I wonder why? They don't call the Marvel movies the M EU, they call it the M CU. Its a Cinematic universe not an Extended universe. Whatever... you know what I mean, lol |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 26, 2017 14:54:21 GMT
C) There have only been 3 DCCU movies, not counting Wonder Woman. By 3 movies in the MCCU it wasn't so clear they were all going to be successful either. Lets remember, Hulk and Thor were not huge Iron Man 1 hits.
But in three films MCU had played their 4 MVPs - better films and better box office was expected. Perhaps, but I'm talking what actually happened as opposed to what was expected. The numbers (Box Office Mojo, and others) comparatively speaking show that at three to four films in, DC EU is actually doing competitively well, if not even ahead actually. We'll take another look when DCEU is at fifteen movies and compare those to MCU first fifteen and see where we're at then. I'll bet they'll still both be in the same ball park. |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 26, 2017 15:17:04 GMT
Oh shit! Thats right! Supergirl (1984) was the first time that was done! That movie is totally a spin-off from the Richard Donner Superman movies that exist in the same universe. Same actor for Jimmy Olsen is in that, and Superman poster with Chris Reeves! lol |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 26, 2017 15:38:44 GMT
But in three films MCU had played their 4 MVPs - better films and better box office was expected. Perhaps, but I'm talking what actually happened as opposed to what was expected. The numbers (Box Office Mojo, and others) comparatively speaking show that at three to four films in, DC EU is actually doing competitively well, if not even ahead actually. DCEU is ahead after 4 movies. DCEU's 1st 4 movies have already grossed $2.9 billion (and Wonder Woman isn't finished yet). If Wonder Woman grosses another $62 million (which it's expected to easily do), then the DCEU's 1st 4 movies will have grossed $3 billion. I don't know if there's another franchise that has ever grossed $3 billion with its 1st 4 movies.
By comparison, MCU's 1st 5 movies grossed $1.7 billion. So MCU's 1st 5 movies grossed $1.2 billion less than DCEU's 1st 4 movies. Moreover, Wonder Woman (DECU's 4th movie) is currently at $652 (the lowest of DCEU's 4 movies) but isn't finished yet and is expected to pass Man of Steel this week. None of MCU's first 5 movies reached $652 million.
So DCEU has already gotten off to a better start than MCU.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 26, 2017 18:16:07 GMT
Perhaps, but I'm talking what actually happened as opposed to what was expected. The numbers (Box Office Mojo, and others) comparatively speaking show that at three to four films in, DC EU is actually doing competitively well, if not even ahead actually. DCEU is ahead after 4 movies. DCEU's 1st 4 movies have already grossed $2.9 billion (and Wonder Woman isn't finished yet). If Wonder Woman grosses another $62 million (which it's expected to easily do), then the DCEU's 1st 4 movies will have grossed $3 billion. I don't know if there's another franchise that has ever grossed $3 billion with its 1st 4 movies.
By comparison, MCU's 1st 5 movies grossed $1.7 billion. So MCU's 1st 5 movies grossed $1.2 billion less than DCEU's 1st 4 movies. Moreover, Wonder Woman (DECU's 4th movie) is currently at $652 (the lowest of DCEU's 4 movies) but isn't finished yet and is expected to pass Man of Steel this week. None of MCU's first 5 movies reached $652 million.
So DCEU has already gotten off to a better start than MCU.
The research I've done seems to show similar numbers to yours. People just have a short memory about how iffy those first few Marvel movies (except for Iron Man of course). Incredible Hulk in particular was very poorly received, and thats their second movie.
The bottom line point that I'm trying to make about the DC movies is that as much as people say they suck, someone's going to see them! A lot of someones!
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 29, 2017 18:38:07 GMT
Some unusual box office for Wonder Woman so far (6-29-17-): Domestic (U.S.) its just become the most money making DCEU movie... yay! Worldwide though its only beat MOS... boo. Whats up wit dat?
|
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Jun 29, 2017 22:05:59 GMT
this has been bothering me for quite a while.........your title.... "Why do some folks continue to INSIST that the DCCU is fail?"
"...is fail?" .......that should be, "...is failing?" "Why do some folk continue to INSIST that the DCEU is failing?"
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 29, 2017 22:52:28 GMT
|
|
barkingbaphomet
Junior Member
all backlit and creepysmoking
@barkingbaphomet
Posts: 2,252
Likes: 1,006
|
Post by barkingbaphomet on Jun 29, 2017 23:08:48 GMT
I believe it's called DCEU. Doesn't make any difference, it still sucks anyway. I guess it IS called DC EU, though I wonder why? They don't call the Marvel movies the M EU, they call it the M CU. Its a Cinematic universe not an Extended universe. Whatever... you know what I mean, lol i expect it's because either or both: 1) D CCU is clumsy on the tongue b. they want to differentiate their endeavor from Marvel's the name is still odd to me, though. extended because it extends beyond one film? bleh. |
|
