For having overly controversial or offensive and contrarian story and visual content.
DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
For having overly controversial or offensive and contrarian story and visual content.
Marvel had team-up The Avengers as its sixth film (four years after starting the universe) and, though not a crossover, a movie with big crossover elements in its third (two years after), DC Justice League as its fourth (four years after starting the universe) and a crossover movie in its second (two and a half years after). Warner was quicker but not that different and I think some of Marvel's initial movies (especially Iron Man 2 and The Incredible Hulk) are also regarded more as misses.
It was a cerebral superhero story devoid of humor that was rated R that cost 130 million dollars.
Deadpool it wasn’t.
Oooo. Yeah. Iron Man 2. *shiver*
If you consider navel gazing and banal monologues to be character development.
No, they just have character development at the same time.
Yeah, I'm gonna have to very strongly disagree with you here, the Marvel movies have great stories, and a plenty of character development. It might not be done in style as Snyder's movies, but it's there just as much, it's not their fault you are apparently completely oblivious to it for some reason.
Its not my fault most of the MCU shoots low like Saturday morning cartoons, and substitutes any real character development (where there are realistic, rational reasons for characters doing A.B, and C) for moving them like action figures from one set-piece to another, a jokebook file, one Easter-egg/post credits link). If that floats you boat, fine, but most of those films lack any characters who feel like they exist beyond a cause for spectacle, then rinse and repeat.
You keep saying that like it's a bad thing.
And financially, the only number that matters in Hollywood, sorta proves the MCU is doing it right for now.
Artistically, obviously, that's up for debate, because that's opinion. But, cold hard cash talks.
If by that you mean they aren't ashamed of their origins and aren't afraid to put their characters in costumes instead of selling out and dressing them all in generic Black Leather...
That's ALL they do. They took characters who started out as respecting authority (Cap) and being totally against being under authority (Stark) and realistically got their characters to the point where it was the reverse (Civil War).
Not enough Nolan monologing for you? Not enough characters explaining every face of their personalities so to spoonfeed the audience?
...because it is, Zoom.
Sooo...that means the Transformers series--a franchise almost universally (and deservedly) dismissed/reviled--is doing something right because its earned nearly 5 billion to date? Dollars alone never equals quality. If that were the case, McDonald's would be considered the pinnacle of healthy, fine dining, but its food stands on the polar opposite of that distinction, like the Transformers series, and many MCU films. Greasy, empty junk.
Or it’s not. Entertain can run the gamut. Nothing wrong with that.
Clearly, yes.
If that was the argument I was making you might be on to something.
But, quality is opinion. Do I think it’s quality? No. But do I think it’s doing something right, serving an audience globally? Of course it is.
It’s show business.
Of course it is. But not every meal or work of art has to be a plate of lettuce with pine nuts.
I don’t know why you are conflating business success and quality—which is purely in the eye of the beholder.
Not all “quality” is gonna be successful, not all shit will sink.
Sometimes I want my Saturday morning cartoon. It’s fun, it’s exciting. And then other times I’ll read my Herman Hesse.
Even if people don't like them, there's is obviously something they are doing right, since the lowest box office for one of them is still nearly 1/2 a billion dollars, and the third and fourth movies made over a billion each. If they really were failures people would have stopped going to them a long time ago.
Who gets to judge the creative failures.
Have people stopped giving them money? Then they are doing something right that rewards their behavior.
Money talks-loudly.
Long story short, many people did stop.
Yes, now. Took a while, which means Hollywood will keep doing it for a while.
They are slow learners.
It's not about learning. It's about leaving money on the table. 400 million is still 400 million, you spend 150 million on the movie, 75 million on advertising....that's still 175 million in profit, and that's not even including any licensing deals and money from airplanes, cable and streaming.
You don't walk away until you LOSE money. And even when you lose money, you can write that off the taxes as a business loss.
Hollywood is much smarter than we give them credit for.