That doesn't make all audiences unable to sort it out.
Let's give audiences more credit than less.
DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Let's give audiences more credit than less.
Why? It's not accurate. The general public is EXTREMELY stupid, and has to be treated as such.
Nope.
I think as long as you explain it to them, they'll get it. My mom's not as into this kind of stuff as I am, and there are a few times she's gotten confused about what stuff is and isn't connected, but all it took was about 10 seconds for me to explain what is and isn't part of the same universe.
As long as they find a way to tell the different universes apart, I think most people will get it.
As long as they find a way to tell the different universes apart, I think most people will get it.
Of course; a lowest common denominator method of creating content kills genres, not create healthy and/or interesting films.
Well considering how the MCU is miles ahead of the more complex DCEU in terms of gross and critical reception, I'd say it's safe to say that a simple, formulaic approach definitely works best.
You guys are just one meet cute away from a romantic comedy.
^Don't fall for that shit again. Let's keep this about single-shared-universe vs multiverse-approach and the intelligence of the general audience, shall we?!
Here's the thing: Some people enjoy these movies without giving it much thought. A lot of people have grown to think that Marvel and Superhero is synonymous, hell, even some boulevard show editors like those at Good Morning Britain not that long ago proclaimed Batman a Marvel character (during a segment on his 80th anniversary, too), and this case is hardly unique.
So, even with the last few DC films establishing a connected shared universe, some people even in positions where they maybe should check Wikipedia on such a basic fact, simply assume every superhero to be Marvel. But those people, while obviously enjoying the movies, also obviously don't think that much about them. This is just entertainment to them, thinking about it while the movie is on, then talking with friends about all the cool moments, and that's it.
But those are also just part of the audience. There are obviously enough people who can distinguish between the two companies. And let's not forget, for a very long time, WB/DC didn't want two live-action versions of any one character at the same time, for fear they could confuse the audience. But having The Flash on TV as well as the movies, Superman, too, Batman and related characters in the movies, and younger versions on TV, it has become clear that audiences might get confused for a moment, but those people who care about it either already know of the different versions, or can easily learn about it. It's not like the marketing of "Justice League" tried to make it appear as if Grant Gustin was in the movie.
And, finally, it's also a case of, just try it out. "Joker" has quite a low budget, even if it doesn't make, say, "Shazam!" numbers, it'll do quite well, while also testing the waters for this kind of approach.
Here's the thing: Some people enjoy these movies without giving it much thought. A lot of people have grown to think that Marvel and Superhero is synonymous, hell, even some boulevard show editors like those at Good Morning Britain not that long ago proclaimed Batman a Marvel character (during a segment on his 80th anniversary, too), and this case is hardly unique.
So, even with the last few DC films establishing a connected shared universe, some people even in positions where they maybe should check Wikipedia on such a basic fact, simply assume every superhero to be Marvel. But those people, while obviously enjoying the movies, also obviously don't think that much about them. This is just entertainment to them, thinking about it while the movie is on, then talking with friends about all the cool moments, and that's it.
But those are also just part of the audience. There are obviously enough people who can distinguish between the two companies. And let's not forget, for a very long time, WB/DC didn't want two live-action versions of any one character at the same time, for fear they could confuse the audience. But having The Flash on TV as well as the movies, Superman, too, Batman and related characters in the movies, and younger versions on TV, it has become clear that audiences might get confused for a moment, but those people who care about it either already know of the different versions, or can easily learn about it. It's not like the marketing of "Justice League" tried to make it appear as if Grant Gustin was in the movie.
And, finally, it's also a case of, just try it out. "Joker" has quite a low budget, even if it doesn't make, say, "Shazam!" numbers, it'll do quite well, while also testing the waters for this kind of approach.
Shazam numbers aren't all that great. It only made grossed 364 million on a 100 million dollar production budget. Who knows how much was spent on advertisement. Ant-Man did better world wide.
Most likely it was profitable, but... it wasn't stellar money for a blockbuster.
But, I agree with your point. Joker's small budget should give it some space to pay off its creative license. And I hope it does, I'd like more approaches like these. Lower budgeted, more creative risks.
It was Joe Chill who killed Bruce Wayne's parents in Batman Begins.
Is this one of those crazy typos where you meant to type J-A-C-K-N-A-P-I-E-R but it somehow came out J-O-E-C-H-I-L-L instead?
Which was my point. "Shazam!" had a small enough budget that its numbers made it a modest success. "Joker"'s budget is only half of "Shazam!"'s, so it's a very calculated risk.
All that matters to fans is that they make enough money that they keep making similar movies. Otherwise it's just meaningless dick-waving.
That's all that matters in reality. It's usually fans of various descriptions who are determined to make a whole lot of other things 'matter' whether they really do or not. It's not Fox or Disney that makes people obsess about which movie will finally beat Avatar.
Did it? There are posters on this board calling it a huge flop.
It's one of those crazy swap the movies situations. The people were complaining that the Joker wasn't the one.
Posters with an agenda. All the industry press and business media -- who, you know, actually understand these things -- regarded it as a success relative to its budget. So did the studio, which is why a sequel was announced as in development almost immediately.
Marvel, as a company, has come a long way. Still, what can they do to stop from becoming stale?