8 Year old question about comic book movies and shows.
By
Agonus,
Posted on: 2012-05-16 22:18 in Comic and Hero-Villain Culture
Go on YouTube and search for "Kevin Smith talks about Superman." And that's why. DC has its own movie production studio ready to go since Warner Bros. owns DC, but there's undoubtedly a lot of wishy-washy-ness and executive interference that prevents the people who actually know what they're doing from putting these movies together.
- CaptainFoamerang
Silverspar on Kelly Hu: A face that could melt paint off the wall *shivers*
Someone play my AE arc! "The Heart of Statesman" ID: 343405
Quote:
Add in the inevitable director/writer/producer/etc., wanting to put their own "spin" on characters that have been around for 50+ years.|
Originally Posted by CaptainFoamerang
Go on YouTube and search for "Kevin Smith talks about Superman." And that's why. DC has its own movie production studio ready to go since Warner Bros. owns DC, but there's undoubtedly a lot of wishy-washy-ness and executive interference that prevents the people who actually know what they're doing from putting these movies together.
|
I think it mostly stems from the studios not...getting...the characters or that universe. The Marvel characters are somewhat more relatable in the fact that the stuff say, Spider-man, goes through (barring the, ya know, webslinging and wall crawling >.<) is stuff most kids went through. That lets the audience put themselves in the shoes of those characters.
Meanwhile, the DC characters tend to be a little more...cosmic? supernatural?, not sure what word I'm looking for here, but don't seem to have the same trials and tribulations that most people go through. And trying to make a movie when they aren't relatable is just that much tougher.
The DC universe also tends to be a little more special effects heavy, which translates to increased production costs if it's done right, IMO.
Personally, I'd take the Flash TV series and Green Lantern movie over Spider-man 1 & 3 or any of the X-men movies.
I'd also take Superman I & II and any of the Batman movies (including the Adam West one) over Daredevil, Elektra, Wolverine: Origins, the horrible Thomas Jane Punisher movie, Ang Lee's Hulk, and Ghost Rider. Heck, I might even take the Supergirl movie and Superman III over those Marvel stinkers.
Putting that aside, I'd say that DC has largely trounced Marvel in the animated arena.
Goodbye may seem forever
Farewell is like the end
But in my heart's the memory
And there you'll always be
-- The Fox and the Hound
Quote:
I think part of the problem is that many of the DC characters are effectively modern-day versions of Olympian gods. Characters like Superman and Wonder Woman can come off as "hard to relate to" because they are so powerful that it's difficult for them to do things that equate to what normal people deal with. I think Batman sort of gets a pass on this because despite all his fancy tech and brains he's just a "normal" man.|
Originally Posted by Dark One
Add in the inevitable director/writer/producer/etc., wanting to put their own "spin" on characters that have been around for 50+ years.
I think it mostly stems from the studios not...getting...the characters or that universe. The Marvel characters are somewhat more relatable in the fact that the stuff say, Spider-man, goes through (barring the, ya know, webslinging and wall crawling >.<) is stuff most kids went through. That lets the audience put themselves in the shoes of those characters. Meanwhile, the DC characters tend to be a little more...cosmic? supernatural?, not sure what word I'm looking for here, but don't seem to have the same trials and tribulations that most people go through. And trying to make a movie when they aren't relatable is just that much tougher. The DC universe also tends to be a little more special effects heavy, which translates to increased production costs if it's done right, IMO. |
There's also this idea that DC characters in general are more "idealized" as heroes. They stand as near-perfect paragons of heroism and virtue. This again makes it more difficult for anyone to write a story that might cause them to change or deviate from their more narrowly-defined and overly serious personas.
Basically I think the Marvel characters have done better in the recent movies mostly because they are more flexible and even more "flawed" from a human point of view. This has given story writers easier access to them as human beings for good material to write workable movies.
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
Marvel makes real people into super heroes, DC tries to make super heroes into real people. One is much more effective and makes realistic, relatable characters, while the other feels much more abstract and is definitely not relatable.
Save Paragon one more time! http://www.cohtitan.com/forum/index....ic,4877.0.html
Petition to end shutting down CoH:
http://www.change.org/petitions/ncso...city-of-heroes
Quote:
I stand firmly behind this concept.|
Originally Posted by Lothic
I think part of the problem is that many of the DC characters are effectively modern-day versions of Olympian gods. Characters like Superman and Wonder Woman can come off as "hard to relate to" because they are so powerful that it's difficult for them to do things that equate to what normal people deal with. I think Batman sort of gets a pass on this because despite all his fancy tech and brains he's just a "normal" man.
There's also this idea that DC characters in general are more "idealized" as heroes. They stand as near-perfect paragons of heroism and virtue. This again makes it more difficult for anyone to write a story that might cause them to change or deviate from their more narrowly-defined and overly serious personas. Basically I think the Marvel characters have done better in the recent movies mostly because they are more flexible and even more "flawed" from a human point of view. This has given story writers easier access to them as human beings for good material to write workable movies. |
I personally was never able to develop any fandom of DC comics as a kid - it eventually turned into a general disdain of DC that kept me from buying Batman, who I did like. There was nothing to work as a relatable or engaging character. I pesonally blame Superman - the over the top too powerful character left zero drama, and I feel that too much of the atmosphere/feel bled over into the rest of DC's material. I've felt this way easily for... at least 20 years or more.
I have felt the same distance with the movies.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zybron1
Marvel makes real people into super heroes, DC tries to make super heroes into real people. One is much more effective and makes realistic, relatable characters, while the other feels much more abstract and is definitely not relatable.
|
City of Heroes was my first MMO, & my favorite computer game.
R.I.P.
Chyll - Bydand - Violynce - Enyrgos - Rylle - Nephryte - Solyd - Fettyr - Hyposhock - Styrling - Beryllos - Rosyc
Horryd - Myriam - Dysquiet - Ghyr
Vanysh - Eldrytch
Inflyct - Mysron - Orphyn - Dysmay - Reapyr - - Wyldeman - Hydeous
It's because you're only showing the kid all the best Marvel content. Remember the live television versions of Spiderman, Doctor Strange, and the Hulk? Or movies like Elektra, Daredevil, the first Captain America movie, Howard the Duck, Ghost Rider, etc., etc., etc.? Those were every bit as miserable as anything DC ever made.
Marvel's got their properties spread out across different studios. DC is WB only.
Also, DC ruled animation for a very, very, very long time. Marvel's just catching up now.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Smedley_Prime
It's because you're only showing the kid all the best Marvel content. Remember the live television versions of Spiderman, Doctor Strange, and the Hulk? Or movies like Elektra, Daredevil, the first Captain America movie, Howard the Duck, Ghost Rider, etc., etc., etc.? Those were every bit as miserable as anything DC ever made.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
Marvel's got their properties spread out across different studios. DC is WB only.
Also, DC ruled animation for a very, very, very long time. Marvel's just catching up now. |
I just think in general the Marvel universe and the way most of its characters work tends to be more "writer-friendly" than the DC universe. Basically it seems to be easier for people to crank out good Marvel stories because they don't have to deal with the inflexible baggage that comes with some of the DC characters.
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
I think the relevant point is here.....would you travel back in time and be my daddy??!
It'd be much better than the **** who I got.
Mr. True Shot.
Level 53: Arrows/Devices/Munitions Blaster
....and hopeless Science-Natzi.
Show him DC animated versus Marvel animated. DC wipes the floor and then some. That includes original animated movies.
As for live-action TV shows, you have the DC properties and pretty much nothing from Marvel. Smallville was a successful show, and Wonder Woman was great for it's time.
In feature films is obviously tilts way to Marvel, and I think the folk here have hit on many of the reasons. A big part of it though is that the franchise holders (Fox for X-Men, Fantastic Four, Daredevil and Sony for Spider-Man) need to keep making quality movies in order to retain the rights. For the Marvel Entertainment movies, it's Marvel calling the shots for the most part.
Warner Brothers owns DC Comics, not the other way around. It's been pretty obvious that the movie arm for most of that time wanted no input from the publishing arm. I have been hoping that the formation of DC Entertainment a couple of years ago to shepherd new DC properties would make some difference, but their first effort, Green Lantern, misfired pretty badly. Hopefully giving Chris Nolan a drivers seat will get DC up and running.
In the end, I hope we get great stuff from both companies.
I completely disagree that DC characters are somehow less "writer-friendly" than Marvel characters. If Marvel can do a Thor movie and make it work, there's no reason why there can't be a Wonder Woman movie.
Global name: @k26dp
The Lynda Carter Wonder Woman series definitely hasn't aged that well, but then again I don't think many people watched it then or now for the "emmy award winning episodes" or "cutting edge FX tech" or "fantastic acting". Call it a hunch 
The Flash TV series, I liked it then and now. From an FX stand point it has aged a bit but is still good. The acting was okay, but I felt it was a nice adaptation of the Barry Allen Flash. Also I liked the irony in the pilot movie where despite his super speed he was still too late to save his brother. The series suffered from a lot of preempting for Persian Gulf coverage then it bounced from time slot to time slot which is usually the kiss of death for a show.
Birds of Prey: nice try, bad results.
Also if you want to talk about super hero shows that haven't aged well, let us not forget The Greatest American Hero. (as much as we may want to)
In terms of animation; Marvel tried for years and had a few diamonds in the rough.
The Spiderman cartoon of the 60's (the one with the classic theme song)
The Spiderman cartoon of the 90's (why this is not on DVD in the States eludes me)
The X-men cartoon of the 90's
Season 1 and the first three episodes of the 90's HULK (rest of season 2 turned way too campy for the HULK)
Avengers Earth's Mightiest Heroes
Marvel animation duds imo: the 90's Iron Man and FF cartoons, season 1 of each was horrid and despite being revamped for Season 2 the damage was done. Nice Iron Man theme song for Season 2 though. Spider-man Unlimited: nice animation, interesting costume design. But Pokemon trumped it in ratings and it was Marvel's attempt to have their own Batman Beyond. The 80's Spiderman cartoon and Spiderman and his Amazing Friends, both were and are a bit too cheesy, though we did get Firestar brought into the comics from it so it's not a total loss. X-men Evolution: Storm and Wolverine are teachers and Cyclops and Jean are students???? You lost me there. The 90's Avengers cartoon.......W.W.N.S.O.T (WE WILL NOT SPEAK OF THIS)
DC Animation: okay first thing is first: we get past our memories of the Superfriends and other campy 60's DC cartoons like GL, Flash, Shazam (also erase your memories of the live action SHAZAM series, you'll feel better), also please file away your memories of the Adam West Batman live TV show and any cartoons that spawned from it (including that dippy Bat-mite character).
DC animation hits: the entire Bruce Timm DCAU which completely trounces what Marvel has done over the years. Batman the Animated Series, Superman the Animated Series, Batman Beyond, Justice League, Justice League Unlimited. Plus all recent JL animated movies such as Batman/Superman Worlds Finest, Public Enemies, etc.
Quote:
No can do. I loved that show. I didn't watch it for the big seven, but rather for Black Vulcan and especially Samurai. Kaze no yo ni hayaku! |
Originally Posted by Nericus
DC Animation: okay first thing is first: we get past our memories of the Superfriends
|
Goodbye may seem forever
Farewell is like the end
But in my heart's the memory
And there you'll always be
-- The Fox and the Hound
Don't forget MTV's Spider-Man: The Animated Series. Personally, I thought that was great and wish it continued past 1 season.
I'm not so sure I agree that DC characters are unrelateable, they however are on a whole other powerlevel.
Yes, DC has some lower powerlevel heroes (Bat Family for instance), but generally, their heroes are to such an extreme in power, that for a movie going audience, it makes it a bit harder to make it good.
You go into the movies and you know the heroes are going to win. But with Marvel heroes, you know they can be beat. With DC Heroes it tends to feel less so. With the lifting of 100tons, running at the speed of light, ect...ect.
funny thing is, they could easily depower Superman and still keep him super and doing a lot of the visually impressive things he's done. Just do away with things like stopping the asteroid on his own 
Make it to where he needs help from some of the other powerhouses.
He could still easily be that OMG MOST POWERFUL HERO IN THE WORLD.
Wonder Woman I think has been shown she can work, if people get past the idea of ruining her. She's super strong, can fight, but while she can take that punch and deflect those bullets, she can still be shot and stabbed, and even beaten up to the point of unconscienceness.
Sadly she has other problems. Her iconic outfit tends to come off better in animation/drawing than in live action. Today's audience seems to lack the ability to suspend some disbelief or even go with the simple idea, that "Hey! I like the way I dress!" well, American audiences anyways seem that way, I don't know how other audiences feel about it.
Though she has seemed to have lost the heels for boots, so at least there's no "you can't run like that in heels!" working against them.
Lastly, I think good writing can come over any obstacle that a DC hero can have, but after listening to the Kevin Smith video again I'm reminded...even if they have good writers, they have idiots in other parts of the process.
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
Quote:
Look at where the two properties base themselves out of.|
Originally Posted by Lothic
I think part of the problem is that many of the DC characters are effectively modern-day versions of Olympian gods. Characters like Superman and Wonder Woman can come off as "hard to relate to" because they are so powerful that it's difficult for them to do things that equate to what normal people deal with. I think Batman sort of gets a pass on this because despite all his fancy tech and brains he's just a "normal" man.
|
DC - The Watchtower. Literally gods in the sky, as far above mortal man as Mt. Olympus was.
Marvel - Stark Tower, Xavier's Mansion, etc. Living, working, breathing amongst the people. Those with feet of clay vs feet of ether.
Even Batman, arguably the most relatable of the DC Pantheon, isn't really. His "life" is so far removed from the rest of us that it's hard to take him seriously. So much money that he's never really had to scrabble for the next meal. Batmobile gets blown up? Eh, buy a new one. Robin needs a batcopter? Hide it in the batarang budget.
There's a small section in Superman/Batman: Public Enemies that says it all:
Batman (thinking): It is a remarkable dichotomy. In many ways, Clark is the most human of us all. Then...he shoots fire from the skies and it is difficult not to think of him as a god. And how fortunate we all are that it does not occur to him.
Batman is the least relatable of the DC characters. Completely unrealistic in his "more realistic" world. He's supposedly a normal guy, but one with more money than God, vast knowledge in dozens of fields while being perpetually in his 30's, and skilled or lucky enough not to get killed over the past ten or so years he's been active.
Superman is very relatable, because once you get past the god-like alien stuff that's pretty much a "hey, just accept it" sort of deal, everything else falls into place in a quite realistic manner. It's Superman's inherent unrealism that makes his stories far more believable because your disbelief is already somewhat suspended. Marketing Batman as realistic while he and his world are decidedly not makes it less believable because you're led to believe that you shouldn't suspend disbelief as much.
At any rate, as a longtime comic reader, I don't see much difference between a DC and a Marvel character anymore. Yes, there was a time during the Silver age where the commonly spouted differences were true, and yes, they may hold some water now with regards to certain characters and their Other Company Counterpart, but if you took all the Marvel characters and all the DC characters, shuffled them together and randomly dealt two universes of characters, there wouldn't be any real difference from the current universes now. (Note: I'm also talking about the Pre-Flashpoint Post-Crisis DCU.)
Quote:
I... my personal interpretations and experiences with both materials is categorically the opposite of this very interesting analysis - to which I cannot subscribe (but have placed into the hopper for later consideration).
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
Batman is the least relatable of the DC characters. Completely unrealistic in his "more realistic" world. He's supposedly a normal guy, but one with more money than God, vast knowledge in dozens of fields while being perpetually in his 30's, and skilled or lucky enough not to get killed over the past ten or so years he's been active.
Superman is very relatable, because once you get past the god-like alien stuff that's pretty much a "hey, just accept it" sort of deal, everything else falls into place in a quite realistic manner. It's Superman's inherent unrealism that makes his stories far more believable because your disbelief is already somewhat suspended. Marketing Batman as realistic while he and his world are decidedly not makes it less believable because you're led to believe that you shouldn't suspend disbelief as much. |
City of Heroes was my first MMO, & my favorite computer game.
R.I.P.
Chyll - Bydand - Violynce - Enyrgos - Rylle - Nephryte - Solyd - Fettyr - Hyposhock - Styrling - Beryllos - Rosyc
Horryd - Myriam - Dysquiet - Ghyr
Vanysh - Eldrytch
Inflyct - Mysron - Orphyn - Dysmay - Reapyr - - Wyldeman - Hydeous
I can elaborate further. Taking them as people illustrates this best. Batman is frequently written as a constantly brooding loner with little to no capacity for trust, friendship or any positive emotions and is obsessive about "the mission". Superman is frequently written as a country boy with traditional morals and values, who has interests and hobbies and friends in both his identities, and does what he does out of a sense of charity. (The best Superman stories also deal with him trying to live up to the expectations that come with being Superman.)
It's really a result of how each character is seen. Batman IS seen as the more relateable one, just by virtue of being from a species that really exists, so there's little effort put towards actually writing him as such. Many newer Batman comics (last decade or two) are written with "make Batman a super-badass" in mind, which is sometimes referred to as the "Batgod".
Superman, however, is commonly seen as unrelatable, so a ton of effort is put forth to make him so, and (at least in my opinion) Superman comes out to be the more believable and the more three dimensional person.
Quote:
Sure there's always the "Marvel has an actual god as a character" angle.|
Originally Posted by RosaQuartz
I completely disagree that DC characters are somehow less "writer-friendly" than Marvel characters. If Marvel can do a Thor movie and make it work, there's no reason why there can't be a Wonder Woman movie.
|
But look at the main premise behind the Thor movie and why it worked. It worked as a "relatable" story because we were presented a god (Thor) who started out all too human in his faults: he was vain, reckless and overconfident in his abilities. These are failings that all too many of us "normal" humans have. It was only after Thor's lesson in humility did he truly earn his mantle of greatness. This is a classic plot that can directly translate to any one of us.
On the other hand you compare that to Superman, a god who basically starts out as a perfect paragon of truth and justice. He's an ideal that very few if any of us could hope to truly relate to. He's the ultimate Boy Scout that apart from the overused Kryptonite trope is basically omnipotent. Hard to make good stories about a character that basically can't be threatened by anything in most circumstances. The same can be said for Wonder Woman, a warrior princess who embodies strength, compassion and virtue to such a degree that there's very little room for her to maneuver as a character which could evolve through a compelling story.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BrandX
Lastly, I think good writing can come over any obstacle that a DC hero can have, but after listening to the Kevin Smith video again I'm reminded...even if they have good writers, they have idiots in other parts of the process.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
At any rate, as a longtime comic reader, I don't see much difference between a DC and a Marvel character anymore. Yes, there was a time during the Silver age where the commonly spouted differences were true, and yes, they may hold some water now with regards to certain characters and their Other Company Counterpart, but if you took all the Marvel characters and all the DC characters, shuffled them together and randomly dealt two universes of characters, there wouldn't be any real difference from the current universes now. (Note: I'm also talking about the Pre-Flashpoint Post-Crisis DCU.)
|
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
Quote:
Yes, bad directing or bad editing will kill a film.
|
Originally Posted by BrandX
Lastly, I think good writing can come over any obstacle that a DC hero can have, but after listening to the Kevin Smith video again I'm reminded...even if they have good writers, they have idiots in other parts of the process. |
Traditionally, Marvel has taken tighter control on their properties when they're adapted to TV or film. They make deals with various studios to make movies and shows about their characters and subsequently they have someone(s) in there from Marvel watching their interests, making sure things are true to their characters, etc.
Is it perfect? No, because all we've seen, they've had some stinkers.
DC Comics is owned by Warner Bros. So who makes *all* the DC Comics films? Warner Bros studios.
So, if there's an AAA project already being produced at the studio taking up resources but the execs want to get Green Lantern out the door to be in time for the summer, who do they give Lantern to? NOT the 'A Team'; the scrub team gets it and the result is stuff like Catwoman.
And since Warner Film knows that they're going to be the ones producing a DC film for sure, they don't have to try as hard to please DC. Studio X and Studio Y both want to make Iron Man, so they're going to pull out all the stops to wow Marvel so they'll get the rights. They're going to get the best director and a script that really pleases Marvel. Warner Film just tells the guys at DC to shut up and get in line.
And since Warner Film and DC are both owned by the same company, DC has less pull since they're just another division. They can't shut it down if they're not getting the best guys at the studio to work on the film. They don't have contracts in place that say "If DC Comics doesn't like how the script and movie is going, they can pull the plug" like Marvel does.
So, in summary, why do Marvel movies tend to do better:
-Marvel has more control than DC does.
-Marvel movies are made by various different studios(for good or ill). DC movies are all made by Warner Bros.
-Competition among studios for Marvel rights makes everyone try even harder.
Of course, all this changed when Disney bought Marvel. Now they're in a similar position as DC is with Warner. How this affects the future of Marvel movies remains to be seen. So far the Avengers is the only film made completely after the takeover and I haven't heard a thing if it was scraping by at the box office or not.
.
Quote:
Which I appreciate in terms of the elaboration and discussion, but reading them and considering the thought behind them only reinforces my own current opinions...|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
Taking them as people illustrates this best.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
Batman is frequently written as a constantly brooding loner with little to no capacity for trust, friendship or any positive emotions and is obsessive about "the mission".
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
Superman is frequently written as a country boy with traditional morals and values, who has interests and hobbies and friends in both his identities, and does what he does out of a sense of charity.
|
edit: which ties back to the comment Lothic made (probably better) 3 posts up (which I read after I typed this up).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
(The best Superman stories also deal with him trying to live up to the expectations that come with being Superman.)
|
That may be unfair...
I don't doubt that it probably is. But it is one of the elements at the core of my dislike of Superman.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
It's really a result of how each character is seen. Batman IS seen as the more relateable one, just by virtue of being from a species that really exists, so there's little effort put towards actually writing him as such.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
Many newer Batman comics (last decade or two) are written with "make Batman a super-badass" in mind, which is sometimes referred to as the "Batgod".
|
(As an aside: except Batman Beyond's re-introduction got me back into comic stores just in time to have DC rudely yank the rug out from under me and send me out of them again.)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperFerret
Superman, however, is commonly seen as unrelatable, so a ton of effort is put forth to make him so, and (at least in my opinion) Superman comes out to be the more believable and the more three dimensional person.
|
I appreciate the discussion.
City of Heroes was my first MMO, & my favorite computer game.
R.I.P.
Chyll - Bydand - Violynce - Enyrgos - Rylle - Nephryte - Solyd - Fettyr - Hyposhock - Styrling - Beryllos - Rosyc
Horryd - Myriam - Dysquiet - Ghyr
Vanysh - Eldrytch
Inflyct - Mysron - Orphyn - Dysmay - Reapyr - - Wyldeman - Hydeous
Quote:
I disagree with all of this pretty much 100%. |
Originally Posted by Lothic
Sure there's always the "Marvel has an actual god as a character" angle.
But look at the main premise behind the Thor movie and why it worked. It worked as a "relatable" story because we were presented a god (Thor) who started out all too human in his faults: he was vain, reckless and overconfident in his abilities. These are failings that all too many of us "normal" humans have. It was only after Thor's lesson in humility did he truly earn his mantle of greatness. This is a classic plot that can directly translate to any one of us. On the other hand you compare that to Superman, a god who basically starts out as a perfect paragon of truth and justice. He's an ideal that very few if any of us could hope to truly relate to. He's the ultimate Boy Scout that apart from the overused Kryptonite trope is basically omnipotent. Hard to make good stories about a character that basically can't be threatened by anything in most circumstances. The same can be said for Wonder Woman, a warrior princess who embodies strength, compassion and virtue to such a degree that there's very little room for her to maneuver as a character which could evolve through a compelling story. |
Superman gets lesson in humanity every single day that he tries to pass himself off as a human. He has to deal with issues that can't be handled by heat vision, super strength, and etc... how to juggle responsibilities, how to get his pretty co-worker to notice him. There was a movie called, simply enough, Superman: The Movie that pretty much perfectly illustrated this. Superman did is not "a god who basically starts out as a perfect paragon of truth and justice". He's fallible and occassionally makes bad choices, only his bad choices can have even more devestating consequences. Superman is an inherantly compelling character, no more or less than Thor, Spider-Man, Batman, or anyone else. And yes, the same can be said for Wonder Woman.
Good writers have been writing good Superman and Wonder Woman stories for some time now. Warner Bros. needs to do what Marvel has done; hire someone smart and versed in that lore to distill it and create a great script. The Avengers didn't come wholesale from the mind of Joss Whedon. He took bits of Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Don Heck, Roy Thomas, Steve Englehart, Kurt Busiek, George Perez, Brian Bendis, Mark Millar, and Bryan Hitch, swirled them all together, added some pretty snappy dialogue, and gave us a great movie.
Chris Nolan did the same with Batman. There's Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson and everyone through Jeph Loeb, Tim Sale, and Jim Lee mixed with his own themes about the nature of self-identity.
Warner Bros. must find someone who can take the best stories about Superman/Wonder Woman/Justice League and integrate them into a tapestry. It shouldn't just be Bryan Singer or Tim Burton's vision. Like Marvel, they need to stand on the shoulders of giants.
Global name: @k26dp
Quote:
And I'm pretty sure you missed my point 100%.|
Originally Posted by RosaQuartz
I disagree with all of this pretty much 100%.
Superman gets lesson in humanity every single day that he tries to pass himself off as a human. He has to deal with issues that can't be handled by heat vision, super strength, and etc... how to juggle responsibilities, how to get his pretty co-worker to notice him. There was a movie called, simply enough, Superman: The Movie that pretty much perfectly illustrated this. Superman did is not "a god who basically starts out as a perfect paragon of truth and justice". He's fallible and occassionally makes bad choices, only his bad choices can have even more devestating consequences. Superman is an inherantly compelling character, no more or less than Thor, Spider-Man, Batman, or anyone else. And yes, the same can be said for Wonder Woman. Good writers have been writing good Superman and Wonder Woman stories for some time now. Warner Bros. needs to do what Marvel has done; hire someone smart and versed in that lore to distill it and create a great script. The Avengers didn't come wholesale from the mind of Joss Whedon. He took bits of Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, Don Heck, Roy Thomas, Steve Englehart, Kurt Busiek, George Perez, Brian Bendis, Mark Millar, and Bryan Hitch, swirled them all together, added some pretty snappy dialogue, and gave us a great movie. Chris Nolan did the same with Batman. There's Bill Finger and Jerry Robinson and everyone through Jeph Loeb, Tim Sale, and Jim Lee mixed with his own themes about the nature of self-identity. Warner Bros. must find someone who can take the best stories about Superman/Wonder Woman/Justice League and integrate them into a tapestry. It shouldn't just be Bryan Singer or Tim Burton's vision. Like Marvel, they need to stand on the shoulders of giants. |
One more time I have never said that it was impossible to write good stories for DC characters. I have enjoyed many good stories based on these characters for decades and for what it's worth I actually tend to prefer DC over Marvel.
I simply maintain my premise that in general the basic nature of many DC characters make them more inflexible to the collective human condition most of us relate to. This makes writing "good" stories for these kinds of characters more difficult than many of the more "humanly flawed" Marvel characters. Writing stories about characters that are more like your audience is always easier.
For the most part DC characters are already perfect and self-actualized. Sure there have been fun stories about Superman trying to learn how to live life as Clark Kent and sure he makes mistakes along the way. But even as Clark Kent he's already the paragon of justice and morality - there is no doubt what he stands for and no doubt he will do anything to preserve the Greater Good. On the other hand many Marvel characters are "grittier" and more morally questionable. They experience more doubts and question their role in the world. Characters like these are far more relatable to the "flawed" human audience and thus there's far more material to explore story-wise. Writers simply have an easier time coming up with stories for these kinds of "less than perfect" characters. Why do you think the best DC movies in the last few years have been Nolan's Batman? It's because Batman is very much more like a "humanly flawed" Marvel character than he is a standard DC one.
Just because it's easier to write stories for Marvel character doesn't guarantee that Marvel stories are -always- better than DC stories. There have been plenty of Marvel stinkers over the years. I just accept that it tends to be easier for writers to work with characters who aren't stoically perfect and the fact that WB has not been able to get a coordinated movie "tapestry" going is symptomatic of that.
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
I really do not know how to approach this and if my son's mom found out she would kill me. But anyhoo, my 8 year old while watching the First Iron Man and an all day comic film run when out of nowhere he asked me why Marvel heroes do well in movies and on TV over DC? (Tho he liked Batman(Christopher Nolan), the Tim Burton ones he thought not as bad but...) Together we saw the Avengers, Watched X-Men( all 3) Spiderman( Toby McGuire), Iron Man, and Thor and said they rocked. But Green Lantern, Superman Returns, made for TV Flash and Wonder Woman and Birds of Prey made him roll his eyes at them and did not enjoy them( tho I told him to be honest WW and Flash were 70's and 90's and were good in their time he did not believe me).
So now I am stuck trying to answer his question, so I turn to my fellow comic book brethren for for help and answers to his question as to why Marvel seems beat DC when it comes to some movies and TV shows.
Please note: We skipped Fantastic 4 and Punisher War Zone, because even I cannot sit through that.