I do not like MCU films

[Trekkin]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Isn't it the American censors that come down on heroes smoking? I know that it's nearly impossible to have television characters smoking pre-watershed, and I'm pretty certain I've heard stories (possibly urban legends) of ratings getting bumped up if whoever is reviewing it gets a bee in their bonnet about it.

You also have legislation about it. Which admittedly, I can't be bothered to read just to win an Internet argument.

You know who else refuses to let their on-screen characters smoke? DC. In both Batman TAS and Gotham, Bullock has to make do with chewing toothpicks.

 

[JD]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Just an FYI, apparently the official name for the DC movie universe is the DC Extended Universe. So it's DCEU now, not DCCU.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

So does that cover their television and animated stuff as well?

 

[Turtletrekker]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

You know who else refuses to let their on-screen characters smoke? DC. In both Batman TAS and Gotham, Bullock has to make do with chewing toothpicks.

See also: Constantine, with a few exceptions.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

I said it was 'off the top of my head' and not researched. It's been a long time since I eread some of this stuff. I wll point out that even material like 70's Ra's Al Ghul stories tended to have rather campy elements which undercut the seriousness.

I am quite familiar with the Ra's Al Ghul (and League of Assassins) story lines, and "campy" was about the only kind of tine absent from that run.

The fact remains that way after Peter Parker had teenage troubles, DC was 'fluff'. By the time of Killing Joke and Death in the Family ? Yeah, DC was gritty.

Again, that's grossly incorrect. Killing Joke / Death in the Family were long after DC's change to several of its superhero titles. Murder, drug addiction, genocide, racism and other subjects were not only covered in the superhero comics, but in their war titles, too.

My 'MCU films seem pretty true to the source material' is referring to the tone, not the content. Few movie adaptations are going to slavishly follow every small (or large) detail from the comics.

Even the tone is dissimilar---at least in Iron Man and the Avengers films, where any of the adapted / suggested handling of characters/plots were not at all like the source in that regard.

You said 'No one needs movies to be tied to TV, as the films will stand on their own, just as the Star Wars films did not need the Clone Wars cartoons.' - well, the original 2003 Clone Wars cartoon was 'in canon' at first and the 2008 one still is. True, it's not essential for film and TV to tie up, but it's a missed opportunity not to.

Not for a story that was intended to be a contained movie or movie series such as Star Wars. If a moviegoer could not grasp the simple concepts of the prequels from the films alone, there was a serious problem--and its not on the screen. Cartoons were not necessary to grasp or even enjoy the point of the prequels.

More to that point, the original SW films told a complete story leaving few longing for more, or thinking questions had not been answered. That is a film (or in that case, trilogy) effectively doing the job as intended.

That wasn't my whole point either - even amongst the purely TV shows, Gotham and possibly Supergirl don't fit.

Do they need to fit? Will fitting--or not--prevent enjoyment of either series?

Do I dislike DC movies ? I love the first three Reeve Superman movies and realy like the one with Brandon Routh. I love The Dark Knight and didn't dislike Batman Begins or Green Lantern 2011. I don't like Burton or Nolan movies in general and EVERYONE thinks the Batman movies that came between theirs were bad.

Well, if you're going back to the Burton/Schumacher Batman movies as part of your judgement on DC-based films, then we can cover the recent and older Marvel movies which left much to be desired:

• the forgettable Fantastic Four movies & the recent, colossal bomb of a reboot.
• Elektra.
• Daredevil.
  
• The Punisher flops (2).
• The Ghost Rider movies.
• The Roger Corman Fantastic Four movie (which might be the worst comic adaptation of all time).
• Ang Lee's terrible Hulk film.
• The misguided Blade sequels.

...the list goes on and on.

...and don't get me started on the Garfield Spider-Man films.

 

[theenglish]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Just an FYI, apparently the official name for the DC movie universe is the DC Extended Universe. So it's DCEU now, not DCCU.

Except that makes no sense considering there is a separate television universe--DCEEU?

 

[M.A.C.O.]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Just an FYI, apparently the official name for the DC movie universe is the DC Extended Universe. So it's DCEU now, not DCCU.

Except that makes no sense considering there is a separate television universe--DCEEU?

The extended universe includes the TV shows as well. Hence DCEU. Geoff Johns, who is the Chief Creative Officer for DC Comics, works on the titles and collaborates on all the shows (Supergirl, Constantine, Arrow, Flash) and the movie verse they are setting up; has said the shows are all separate from the movies. However, there may be plans to bring them all together later. Rumor is, DC is planning a Crisis on Infinite Earth's type event in the future.

 

[JD]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Apparently the name comes from the stuff about Suicide Squad in the new Empire magazine. I don't think I've heard any kind of official name, or at least one coming from the producers, for the CW shows/Constantine.

 

[Anwar]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Man of Steel was a very dark and gritty film and very serious.

Not really, it dealt with more adolescent issues than adult issues.

pquote]DC succeeded in this film even on villains alone. Zod was a real threat. Marvel has ruined all their villains and when villains are messed up the seriousness of the films crumbles.[/quote]

No, it just means the movie was about the hero and not the villain. If you go to a film for the villain, it's because you don't care about the hero.

Ultron

He served his purpose. He was a plot device while the real struggles were the Avengers against themselves.

Manderian

A very good example of how threats are manufactured by people in power to give people false images to hate and thus distract them from the real problems.

Loki

Quite well done.

the villain from GOTG where skylord had to sing and dance in front of him thereby telling us that the villain is not to be taken seriously.

No, it's to show Star-Lord (you can't even get his name right?)'s character. Ronan is an alien Warlord, why would he understand what Star-Lord was doing?

i think this shows how light hearted marvel films are and the jokes and out of place humour does not help.

Real life is full of humor.

Sentinels in DOFP is how you do evil robots that want to wipe out humanity not Ultron. DC and Xmen seems more for adults and marvel is more for kids.

The Sentinel's effectiveness was more because of how poorly the X-Men were at fighting.

 

[Anwar]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Sorry for another post. Just saw this reply.

How can MCU be true to the source material after generic and kiddy villains like

Ultron

Covered this.

Wiplash

Rourke wanted the movie to be about him instead of Iron Man.

The Manderian

Loki

Covered these.

Your problem is that you want the movies to be about the villains instead of the heroes. That's the lazy way out.

god only knows what MCU would have done to Magneto or the sentinels if they had the access to the character.

They'd probably make the movie be about the internal conflict between the X-Men instead of having the plot be driven by an external villain. And they'd have the X-Men not be portrayed as 100% in the right in what they're doing or how they do it. IE, the Humans who fear mutants would actually be recognized for having an understandable argument and the X-Men can even understand where the humans are coming from.

And marvel heroes are all superficial and clean cutter.

They aren't the archetype heroes of DC, and I see you can't prove your stance.

I heard disney even banned smoking in the marvel films

So Disney doesn't want to encourage people to kill themselves. How awful.

As for anything Trek God 1 says...I'm sorry you hate how real people act so much. I'm sorry you can't see that some things will be changed due to pragmatism, and I'm sorry everything has to be some grim pretentious drivel about characters who are archetypes first and characters second to register with you.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

I hate to humor this topic, but for the sake of argument, how much smoking has there been in recent DC films? No going back to the last millennium.

 

[Anwar]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Not much, really. In fact, I'd say MCU has more people drinking than most DC films have in recent time.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Wait, Dales getting Quill's name wrong was an accident? Oh man, that could almost have been clever.

 

[Gaith]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Just an FYI, apparently the official name for the DC movie universe is the DC Extended Universe. So it's DCEU now, not DCCU.

Except that makes no sense considering there is a separate television universe--DCEEU?

The extended universe includes the TV shows as well. Hence DCEU. Geoff Johns, who is the Chief Creative Officer for DC Comics, works on the titles and collaborates on all the shows (Supergirl, Constantine, Arrow, Flash) and the movie verse they are setting up; has said the shows are all separate from the movies. However, there may be plans to bring them all together later. Rumor is, DC is planning a Crisis on Infinite Earth's type event in the future.

A Crisis?! I'll believe it when I see it.

No, "DCCU" makes even more sense as a name than "MCU", given that the the MCU isn't limited to movies like the Snyderverse is. The most convincing reason for them not to go that logical path is stubborn pride.

So, until I see a compelling reason to use other names, it's "Arrowverse", "Snyderverse" and other individual titles for moi.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Except that makes no sense considering there is a separate television universe--DCEEU?

The extended universe includes the TV shows as well. Hence DCEU. Geoff Johns, who is the Chief Creative Officer for DC Comics, works on the titles and collaborates on all the shows (Supergirl, Constantine, Arrow, Flash) and the movie verse they are setting up; has said the shows are all separate from the movies. However, there may be plans to bring them all together later. Rumor is, DC is planning a Crisis on Infinite Earth's type event in the future.

A Crisis?! I'll believe it when I see it.

No, "DCCU" makes even more sense as a name than "MCU", given that the the MCU isn't limited to movies like the Snyderverse is. The most convincing reason for them not to go that logical path is stubborn pride.

So, until I see a compelling reason to use other names, it's "Arrowverse", "Snyderverse" and other individual titles for moi.

Well Snyderverse may not be a stick, since Snyder is movie on after JL.

DCEU makes sense.

Flash just opened the idea of parallel universes, and Johns is a HUGE Flash fan. Like I said, a Crisis movie is the rumor, but with how the DCEU is set up. It could work.

We have the Arrowverse (Arrow, Flash, Legends of Tomorrow) with Green Arrow, Black Canary, Flash, Atom, Firestorm, Doctor Light II, Hawkman, Hawkgirl, Rip Hunter and now Constantine from the NBC show.

The movies so far have Superman, Batman, WW, GL, Flash (not sure which one), Cyborg, Shazam and Aquaman. Also the Suicide Squad characters.

The Blue Beetle/Booster Gold and the Justice League Dark movies are in development. Word is, they will be separate from the other JL movies.

There is the Supergirl show, and allegedly a TT show in development.

So yeah man, if WB can pull this off, it will be epic. A true Crisis!

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Yeah, I'd love to see the Monitor show up in the DCWverse and in the background a series of screens with clips from the various live action DC properties playing. Everything from the early serials to the current crop of TV and movie properties. A fangasm that might actual kill a few of us.

 

[suarezguy]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

• Ang Lee's terrible Hulk film.
• The misguided Blade sequels.

...the list goes on and on.

...and don't get me started on the Garfield Spider-Man films.

I think it's interesting that Ang Lee's Hulk and Marvel's The Incredible Hulk are generally regarded similarly, ignored or considered to be failures (although I liked the second one much more). It'll also be interesting to see how fans react to the MCU Spider-Man when it'll be somewhat competing with (memories of) the past adaptations, already I think there's less enthusiasm. It'll be particularly interesting if they do Dr. Octopus again, that'll be a chance to compare and see if Marvel does tone down one of their villains.

Your problem is that you want the movies to be about the villains instead of the heroes. That's the lazy way out.

I think it's fair that the MCU movies do focus much more on the heroes than villains and the fans tend to prefer that while most other adaptations focus equally if not more on the villains (with the notable exceptions of both Raimi and Webb Spider-Man and Batman Begins).

 

[Anwar]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

The Nolan films were more about the villains than Batman IMO, The Dark Knight was especially guilty of this.

 

[JD]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Considering he originated as a villainous character (before being remodelled), was created in 1933 and first appeared in his classic form in 1938, I doubt it had anything to do with WW2.

Anti-Semitic Nazi Ideology that offended Jewish people was around before WWII officially started.

Supes and Cap are quite different in terms of name/title. Supes is literally superior physically and (because he is the hero) morally.

And he happens to be in American colors and stand up for American values. It's stated in every introduction he's for "The American Way!"

Cap represents the virtues of a specific nation, which it is implied is morally superior to all others.

Difference being that within his own stories it's made clear he was meant to be a deliberate propaganda icon to help inspire the War Effort in America, and what this entails is actually explored.

The irony of Captain America's position is interesting to explore, and has been done so, but you can't be ironic all the time because there is an underlying sincerity in the character's conception, so there are always times when he is an unironic flag-waving patriot for a particular nation, rather than a universal hero.

Superman is more often then not portrayed as an unambiguous flag-waver for America, much more than Cap is. Cap's stories have been pretty progressive and anti-nationalistic since he was revived in the 1960s.

Cap's stories have been pretty progressive and anti-nationalistic since he was revived in the 1960s.

I disagree.

.

I agree with Anwar. Cap has been one of the more progressive books. Tackling war, race and politics on a regular basis. My introduction to Cap was in the late Sixties/early Seventies with the issues that introduced the Falcon, the first African-American Superhero, and they quickly promoted him to costar status with his name in the masthead. To me the book will always be "Captain America and the Falcon". That run included the classic storyline were Steve Rogers gives up the Cap identity because of political corruption at the highest level.

Except that makes no sense considering there is a separate television universe--DCEEU?

The extended universe includes the TV shows as well. Hence DCEU. Geoff Johns, who is the Chief Creative Officer for DC Comics, works on the titles and collaborates on all the shows (Supergirl, Constantine, Arrow, Flash) and the movie verse they are setting up; has said the shows are all separate from the movies. However, there may be plans to bring them all together later. Rumor is, DC is planning a Crisis on Infinite Earth's type event in the future.

A Crisis?! I'll believe it when I see it.

No, "DCCU" makes even more sense as a name than "MCU", given that the the MCU isn't limited to movies like the Snyderverse is. The most convincing reason for them not to go that logical path is stubborn pride.

So, until I see a compelling reason to use other names, it's "Arrowverse", "Snyderverse" and other individual titles for moi.

I don't really care that much for the name either, but it it sounds like that is the name given to it by the people in charge of the movies.

Where do you guys get the idea that the name includes the TV series too? They're in a separate universe, so I would assume they would need their own name separate from the movies. I like Berlantiverse since Greg Berlanti is one of the big connections, DCWUniverse isn't bad either, but if Supergirl does get incorporated into it then it would need a name isn't limited to just the CW. Not to mention the fact that the shows air on other channels in other countries.

 

[theenglish]

Re: DC Films for Adults and Marvel films for Kiddies?

Where do you guys get the idea that the name includes the TV series too? They're in a separate universe, so I would assume they would need their own name separate from the movies. I like Berlantiverse since Greg Berlanti is one of the big connections, DCWUniverse isn't bad either, but if Supergirl does get incorporated into it then it would need a name isn't limited to just the CW. Not to mention the fact that the shows air on other channels in other countries.

For me, it just seemed like somebody from corporate trying to come up with a name different than Marvel.

It's ironic because, in fact, the term "extended universe" fits the Marvel model better (MCEU) because the television and movie programs are connected. DCCU would better fit that company because the plans seem to be to keep the cinematic and television universes separate.