|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 18:23:26 GMT
- DCEU is the first franchise with two black leads (female and male in SS) and a female antagonist in one movie (SS); MCU after 17+ movies is announcing a black male lead after DC successfully did it, deplorable! MCU did it with Nick Fury and Falcon in Winter Soldier before SS if we want to reach for this one. |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 18:25:53 GMT
It's really not fair to compare DCEU's first 4 films with the MCU's first 4 films since the DCEU films are benefiting from the cbm surge that the MCU brought about. Plus it's comparing established characters with pre-existing fan bases to B list characters that Marvel had to build. It would be like comparing a Spider-Man movie to a Green Lantern movie and saying "Ha ha...Marvel won that one!" |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 18:32:38 GMT
Yes, Man of Steel, beat the lowest of the low hanging fruit in its competition. Is that even worth a clap? Only because they featured more recognizable characters and didn't have to compete with a Harry Potter movie. Civil War still reigned supreme that year, and didn't get any Razzies. Nope. You can't remove Spider-Man, because he's part of the MCU, regardless of who gets the ticket money. Nice try, though. Prior to Man of Steel, Superman's last two movies included a bomb and a disappointment, neither were good movies either. Thor Dark World on the other ha d was following the critically acclaimed The Avengers, one of the biggest movies ever and what it benefitted a lot from. So yes it does warrant a clap. Being recognisable is not a guarantee for success especially as Wonder Woman on her own across Civil War which was essentially an Avengers movie. Spider-man part be part of the MCU but it isn't a Disney movie and Columbia Pictures was the main production studio involved, not Marvel studios. So yeah at the domestic box office, in 2016 the two DC movies outgrossed the two Marvel studios movies and that might happen again. Could even be worldwide actually. Spider-Man Homecoming is a part of the MCU box office. I know you don't want to include it even though the conversation is actually about the popularity of MCU characters. It's currently their #6 grosser. www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=avengers.htm |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 18:37:31 GMT
Civil War: Yes, the Avengers were in it... for about five minutes. The major conflict everyone remembers is between Steven, Bucky, and Tony. Spider-Man is going to be in Infinity War. He counts. Period. No uses just the U.S. domestic gross (except idiots trying to bolster the DCEU's numbers). At the end of the day, people look at the world wide totals when discussing how successful a film was. They were in it for a considerable amount and the plot only happened in the first place because of The Avengers. Captain America, Iron Man, Falcon, Black Widow, Vision and Scarlet Witch all had good sized roles in that movie. It can definitely be considered an Avengers lite. Spider-man is part of the MCU yes but Homecoming was not a Marvel Studios movie, it was not a Disney movie. It's not money that they are going to get. DC have had two movies, Marvel Studios has had two movies, Fox has had one movie and Sony has had one movie. The US gross is the most accurate to make for a fair comparison. What really matters at the end of the day is profit. Wonder Woman was a more profitable movie than Spider-man or Guardians of the Galaxy. It might have grossed less but it made them more money so it was the more successful movie. So that makes BvS "Justice League lite"....which lost to "Avengers lite". That's a direct comparison if that's what we are going for. And the "more profitable" card doesn't mean anything. That's got nothing to do with butts in seats. The studio bookkeepers are happy but that doesn't mean the character is more popular because it made "more profit". |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 18:44:10 GMT
Alright, I'll admit it. There are a lot of stupid people in this world, so of course WW was more profitable. I didn't undermine anything. You're the one trying to undermine CA3 coming out on top. You're using every excuse in the book to make it look like it didn't win fair and square. Its almost like you don't want to admit that the MCU has done anything impressive. I don't care. Your insistence that the MCU has lost is getting very tiring. You're too blinded by your love for this series that you can't stay composed whenever anyone says anything that seems against Marvel. I never said that MCU lost, not once did I ever say that. I said financially it is matching it on the same level. Wonder Woman did match Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and Spider-man Homecoming on the same level. DC's movies last year did match Marvel's movies at the domestic box office and slightly trailed it at the worldwide box office on a somewhat similar level. Going by tracking and projections, Justice League will also match the other Marvel movies of this year on the same level. Oh now you go back to butts in seats as if that is related to "profit". No...WW still put less butts in the seats. You were talking about "profit" ...a different subject. JL better match the other Marvel movies this year. That's DC's big gun. Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Aquaman and the Justice League name..... Against Thor and Hulk. Solo Spider-Man. And Guardians of the Galaxy. It's shouldn't be close. The fact that it will be close is a huge compliment to what Marvel has accomplished. Go back 10 years and try to tell someone that these Marvel B listers would be in the conversation with a JL movie featuring the much lauded "trinity". Even Spidey would not be expected to hold up against that. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 9, 2017 18:45:37 GMT
They were in it for a considerable amount and the plot only happened in the first place because of The Avengers. Captain America, Iron Man, Falcon, Black Widow, Vision and Scarlet Witch all had good sized roles in that movie. It can definitely be considered an Avengers lite. Spider-man is part of the MCU yes but Homecoming was not a Marvel Studios movie, it was not a Disney movie. It's not money that they are going to get. DC have had two movies, Marvel Studios has had two movies, Fox has had one movie and Sony has had one movie. The US gross is the most accurate to make for a fair comparison. What really matters at the end of the day is profit. Wonder Woman was a more profitable movie than Spider-man or Guardians of the Galaxy. It might have grossed less but it made them more money so it was the more successful movie. So that makes BvS "Justice League lite"....which lost to "Avengers lite". That's a direct comparison if that's what we are going for. And the "more profitable" card doesn't mean anything. That's got nothing to do with butts in seats. The studio bookkeepers are happy but that doesn't mean the character is more popular because it made "more profit". Batman vs Superman wasn't Justice League lite to the same extent. It only really had 3 of the 6 in it (for more than 30 seconds) and the plot didn't revolve around the Justice League which of doesn't exist yet. And no I'm not saying profit amounts to popularity. Just that it was more profitable and more successful. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 9, 2017 19:10:05 GMT
The MCU should enjoy it whilst it lasts. The DCEU may be sick, but Thor is no Batman. Batman is just one film away from restoring his crown, no matter when it happens. MCU may win this battle, but it won’t win the war. The MCU already has won the war. Marvel is the bigger brand. I don't understand the thought that DC is bigger when even WW with what was considered a really strong movie got outsold by Thor. MOS wasn't good IMO but I agree it wasn't trash and yet it didn't get to 700. I think it's ok to go ahead and admit that Marvel is the bigger brand. Just continue to pretend that DC has some rabbit to pull out of it's hat doesn't really make any sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 9, 2017 19:22:49 GMT
- DCEU is the first franchise with two black leads (female and male in SS) and a female antagonist in one movie (SS); MCU after 17+ movies is announcing a black male lead after DC successfully did it, deplorable! MCU did it with Nick Fury and Falcon in Winter Soldier before SS if we want to reach for this one. jeez, said no one never. Why? It's pure nonsense. Fury plus Falcon were clearly sidekicks to the lead as every remotely reasonable person will tell you - or just take the title of the movie: Captain America - it's not that difficult. Fury even faux-died during half the movie, Falcon is completely irrelevant, even less than IM's black sidekick who was exchanged with another actor. In SS you have the Amanda Waller (V Davis) who has most of the dialogue, and next to her is Deadshot (W Smith) as male lead. Harley and Joker are significantly less in the film, and they have less of an arc than say Deadshot with his daughter. QED dude. QED. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 9, 2017 19:39:57 GMT
MCU did it with Nick Fury and Falcon in Winter Soldier before SS if we want to reach for this one. jeez, said no one never. Why? It's pure nonsense. If you can't accept that MCU still did it first, maybe. |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 19:51:01 GMT
So that makes BvS "Justice League lite"....which lost to "Avengers lite". That's a direct comparison if that's what we are going for. And the "more profitable" card doesn't mean anything. That's got nothing to do with butts in seats. The studio bookkeepers are happy but that doesn't mean the character is more popular because it made "more profit". Batman vs Superman wasn't Justice League lite to the same extent. It only really had 3 of the 6 in it (for more than 30 seconds) and the plot didn't revolve around the Justice League which of doesn't exist yet. And no I'm not saying profit amounts to popularity. Just that it was more profitable and more successful. Oh how convenient that you set a time limit that just happens to exclude the extra characters in BvS!  Never mind that BvS featured Batman...Superman....and Wonder Woman. Compared to CW's Capt America....Iron Man...and Spider-Man. That's how far Marvel has come. Now their B listers can beat the "holy trinity" in their very first appearance on film. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2017 19:53:26 GMT
The MCU should enjoy it whilst it lasts. The DCEU may be sick, but Thor is no Batman. Batman is just one film away from restoring his crown, no matter when it happens. MCU may win this battle, but it won’t win the war. The MCU already has won the war. Marvel is the bigger brand. I don't understand the thought that DC is bigger when even WW with what was considered a really strong movie got outsold by Thor. MOS wasn't good IMO but I agree it wasn't trash and yet it didn't get to 700. I think it's ok to go ahead and admit that Marvel is the bigger brand. Just continue to pretend that DC has some rabbit to pull out of it's hat doesn't really make any sense. DC has Batman, and to a lesser extent but not insignificantly, Superman. Batman is very popular and always will be. Batman’s rep hasn’t even been scratched by the critically panned DCEU. There will continue to be Batman films so long as film itself exists. Also just one critically acclaimed Batman film would put him at the top again. That can’t be said about any of the MCU characters except perhaps Spider-Man. If Iron Man was recast and the film was not well received you can bet that Iron Man would be rested for an extended period. Ditto Cap and Thor and all the other MCU heroes. My opinion is that the DCEU totally screwed up, but the characters haven’t been tarnished. The MCU has done the best with less and are reaping the rewards, that’s all. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 9, 2017 19:59:10 GMT
That can’t be said about any of the MCU characters except perhaps Spider-Man. Says you, the characters are endearing enough to survive recasts now that they're more firmly in the public consciousness. |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 20:03:51 GMT
MCU did it with Nick Fury and Falcon in Winter Soldier before SS if we want to reach for this one. jeez, said no one never. Why? It's pure nonsense. Fury plus Falcon were clearly sidekicks to the lead as every remotely reasonable person will tell you - or just take the title of the movie: Captain America - it's not that difficult. Fury even faux-died during half the movie, Falcon is completely irrelevant, even less than IM's black sidekick who was exchanged with another actor. In SS you have the Amanda Waller (V Davis) who has most of the dialogue, and next to her is Deadshot (W Smith) as male lead. Harley and Joker are significantly less in the film, and they have less of an arc than say Deadshot with his daughter. QED dude. QED. Oh NOW it's time to call it a "Captain America movie"! I like how that is a fluid thing with DC fans depending on the circumstances. If you want to claim it's "Avengers 2.5" to make an excuse for box office then you'll notice even minor characters. But now Nick Fury won't count of course while you'll pretend Amanda Waller was some kind of major character. Sure....she gets all of 4 seconds screen time in the trailer. Don't blink you'll miss her: Oh yeah...Harley is an afterthought compared to Waller, right?  Nick Fury gets that much and more as he appears all over the Winter Soldier trailer: |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2017 20:03:53 GMT
That can’t be said about any of the MCU characters except perhaps Spider-Man. Says you, the characters are endearing enough to survive recasts now that they're more firmly in the public consciousness. I agree they are but only to a degree. Not enough to shake a couple of cinematic failures. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 9, 2017 20:08:04 GMT
jeez, said no one never. Why? It's pure nonsense. If you can't accept that MCU still did it first, maybe. if you really believe it it's not a lie - but a delusion. Lets play. Questions: 1. If the black guys were the leads in Cap 2, but not Cap, why is it that MCU greatly promote their first black lead with Black Catman then? Bc the MCU fans are stupid? 2. If the black males really were the leads in Cap 2: How does that agree with you claiming it's lazy writing when the hero is overshadowed and not the star of the film all others just plot devices? So I guess in Cap 2 like in Cap 3 really others were the leads and stars and Cap sidelined. 3. And finally where is a female black lead in all of this? In your fantasy that's where. You MCU fans are like little kids really, you just claim and make up stuff when it's convenient without any rhyme or reason. My amusement is manifold.  |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 20:10:29 GMT
Says you, the characters are endearing enough to survive recasts now that they're more firmly in the public consciousness. I agree they are but only to a degree. Not enough to shake a couple of cinematic failures. There is literally a movie in theaters at this moment which disproves that statement. Thor 3. Not only did he survive 2 mediocre movies...he is now thriving despite never being established before those failures to build up a cushion. So obviously characters need good movies to thrive. That's no different for any of them. Batman could barely break 200 million after Batman and Robin. And Batman Begins is excellent so even a good movie is no guarantee. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 9, 2017 20:13:48 GMT
The MCU already has won the war. Marvel is the bigger brand. I don't understand the thought that DC is bigger when even WW with what was considered a really strong movie got outsold by Thor. MOS wasn't good IMO but I agree it wasn't trash and yet it didn't get to 700. I think it's ok to go ahead and admit that Marvel is the bigger brand. Just continue to pretend that DC has some rabbit to pull out of it's hat doesn't really make any sense. DC has Batman, and to a lesser extent but not insignificantly, Superman. Batman is very popular and always will be. Batman’s rep hasn’t even been scratched by the critically panned DCEU. There will continue to be Batman films so long as film itself exists. Also just one critically acclaimed Batman film would put him at the top again. That can’t be said about any of the MCU characters except perhaps Spider-Man. If Iron Man was recast and the film was not well received you can bet that Iron Man would be rested for an extended period. Ditto Cap and Thor and all the other MCU heroes. My opinion is that the DCEU totally screwed up, but the characters haven’t been tarnished. The MCU has done the best with less and are reaping the rewards, that’s all. Batman is a thing, sure. I agree. Superman isn't. He's got a yeah ok it's superman sort of reputation at this point. It's not bad, but it ain't special.
The MCU's existence to the degree it has evolved is the war having been won. Nothing DC ever does is topping it.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Nov 9, 2017 20:14:49 GMT
If you can't accept that MCU still did it first, maybe. if you really believe it it's not a lie - but a delusion. Lets play. Questions: 1. If the black guys were the leads in Cap 2, but not Cap, why is it that MCU greatly promote their first black lead with Black Catman then? Bc the MCU fans are stupid? 2. If the black males really were the leads in Cap 2: How does that agree with you claiming it's lazy writing when the hero is overshadowed and not the star of the film all others just plot devices? So I guess in Cap 2 like in Cap 3 really others were the leads and stars and Cap sidelined. 3. And finally where is a female black lead in all of this? In your fantasy that's where. You MCU fans are like little kids really, you just claim and make up stuff when it's convenient without any rhyme or reason. My amusement is manifold. I like how you pretend anyone said " the leads" and then build your entire argument on that straw man. No...they were lead characters just like your Amanda Waller example. Got anything real? Should we start making up fake "accomplishments" for other movies? First Russian villain? Iron Man 2! Let me guess...Black Panther being the first ever CBM with an almost all black cast won't be included in these nebulous fake lists of "accomplishments", right? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2017 20:16:48 GMT
I agree they are but only to a degree. Not enough to shake a couple of cinematic failures. There is literally a movie in theaters at this moment which disproves that statement. Thor 3. Not only did he survive 2 mediocre movies...he is now thriving despite never being established before those failures to build up a cushion. So obviously characters need good movies to thrive. That's no different for any of them. Batman could barely break 200 million after Batman and Robin. And Batman Begins is excellent so even a good movie is no guarantee. Thor and Thor 2’s success was due largely to his role in the MCU. Take that away and I doubt the films would have been successful. But when I said that these characters couldn’t survive a couple of failures I mean after the current MCU popularity. Thor, Ant-Man and Dr Strange’s success is obviously propped up by their involvement in the MCU. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 9, 2017 20:20:37 GMT
Batman vs Superman wasn't Justice League lite to the same extent. It only really had 3 of the 6 in it (for more than 30 seconds) and the plot didn't revolve around the Justice League which of doesn't exist yet. And no I'm not saying profit amounts to popularity. Just that it was more profitable and more successful. Oh how convenient that you set a time limit that just happens to exclude the extra characters in BvS! Never mind that BvS featured Batman...Superman....and Wonder Woman. Compared to CW's Capt America....Iron Man...and Spider-Man. That's how far Marvel has come. Now their B listers can beat the "holy trinity" in their very first appearance on film. Well it is true, Cyborg and Aquaman was in it for a few seconds and Flash 30 seconds more. Civil War had Black Widow, Falcon, Ant-man, Spider-man, Scarlet Witch, Vision etc for a decent amount of time in it. They were in the trailers and everything. I wouldn't really call them B Listers at this point. Once Captain America, Thor, Hulk and Iron Man were in a movie that grossed $1.5 billion they're as mainstream as they can be. Batman vs Superman also had bad reviews which affected it quite a lot. It would have outgrossed Civil War domestically if it was as good as that was. |
|
