Marvel's movies vs DC's.

But the initial chapter of Marvel Studios' plan to be a stand-alone studio paid immediate dividends. The success of Jon Favreau's character-rich adaptation also provided the latest evidence that Marvel has a better grasp on its moviemaking strategy than arch-rival DC.
Click to expand...

What the...?

Entertainment Weekly writer Marc Bernardin says it's premature to give Marvel the edge. As he (correctly) points out, Marvel's had just one certified self-financed hit. "Marvel's just coming into their own, so I think it's way too early to declare "Mission: Accomplished And if you look at the films they've done in partnerships with other studios, they've had as many failures as they have successes," he says.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Marvel have had some great, immensely enjoyable, well-crafted, fun-to-watch comic book movies.

DC have three films which are among the best motion pictures ever made.

Done.
 
Last edited:
Gothamite said:
Marvel have had some great, immensely enjoyable, well-crafted, fun-to-watch comic book movies.

DC have three films which are among the best motion pictures ever made.

Done.
Click to expand...

Which three?

I agree, though. X-Men was decently fun, Spider-Man was decently fun (although I cringed regularly throughout), Blade was a nice dumb action movie. Iron Man is the only movie that I'd qualify as possibly having status as a good film in its own right. OTOH, the original Superman, Batman Begins, and Batman (to a lesser extent) were all exceptional to me.

I'm excited about the possibilities that Marvel has for making films in the future, but now that I really sit down and think about it, DC does have the better track record.
 
Last edited:
Zombipanda said:
Which three?
Click to expand...

the original Superman, Batman Begins, and Batman (to a lesser extent) were all exceptional to me.
Click to expand...

You've named them. And I would also consider Batman 1989 to be the lesser of the three, even though it's still awesome.

Iron Man is the only movie that I'd qualify as possibly having status as a good film in its own right.
Click to expand...

I disagree completely. I would actually consider Iron Man to be the quintessential Marvel film in that it's a fun, exciting, well-made comic book movie with fine performance from all of the cast, but it doesn't stretch the genre at all, beyond injecting a bit of James Bond style coolness into it. There's no emotional pull to it, whatsoever. It's just flash-bang-sex fun.

I'm excited about the possibilities that Marvel has for making films in the future, but now that I really sit down and think about it, DC does have the better track record.
Click to expand...

Realistically, I can see things staying pretty much the same, with Marvel continously making great Summer Blockbusters, DC occasionally bringing out an all-time great and both companies churning out clunkers at an alarming rate.
 
I'd consider Spider-Man and X2 to be two of the greatest movies ever made for many reasons, and probably better than Superman: The Movie and Batman(also two of the greatest movies ever).

The problem with DC's argument is that although they've had some great Superman and Batman films in the past, in "the new generation" of superhero movies(which Marvel started), they've had two films total, one of which was brilliant and the other a sad mess that didn't even make enough money to guarantee a sequel, let alone guarantee one three days after it hits theaters which Marvel's been able to pull off half a dozen times.

Marvel's had at least 7 great, widely acclaimed and successful films so far and they've still got the untapped well of Iron Man sequels and Captain America/The Avengers. DC has Batman, Superman(if they can get their **** back together, only took them about two decades last time), and the shakey possibility of a Justice League movie and maybe the Flash. After that.... what? Does anybody really still expect a three-film long Wonder Woman or Green Lantern franchise to happen?

Marvel wins here.
 
Last edited:
Planet-man said:
in "the new generation" of superhero movies(which Marvel started), they've had two films total, one of which was brilliant and the other a sad mess that didn't even make enough money to guarantee a sequel, let alone guarantee one three days after it hits theaters which Marvel's been able to pull off half a dozen times.
Click to expand...

Actually DC has had more than 2

Batman Begins
Superman Returns
Catwoman
Road to Perdition
v for vendetta
A History of Violence
Constantine
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

I maybe leaving some off.
 
SSJmole said:
Actually DC has had more than 2

Batman Begins
Superman Returns
Catwoman
Road to Perdition
v for vendetta
A History of Violence
Constantine
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

I maybe leaving some off.
Click to expand...

I'd like to point out that only 3 of those are actual super-hero movies (there is a difference between Comic movies and Super-Hero movies)

okay 4, I'll give you Constantine
 
Gemini said:
I'd like to point out that only 3 of those are actual super-hero movies (there is a difference between Comic movies and Super-Hero movies)

okay 4, I'll give you Constantine
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were but the thread is Marvel's movies vs DC's. The Punisher is not a superhero movie but It's still a Marvel movie though.


But from list more than 4.

  • Batman Begins (since people count it as one)
  • Superman Returns
  • Catwoman
  • v for vendetta (if batman counts this does)
  • Constantine
  • The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

that's 6!
 
SSJmole said:
I didn't say they were but the thread is Marvel's movies vs DC's. The Punisher is not a superhero movie but It's still a Marvel movie though.


But from list more than 4.

  • Batman Begins (since people count it as one)
  • Superman Returns
  • Catwoman
  • v for vendetta (if batman counts this does)
  • Constantine
  • The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

that's 6!
Click to expand...

Please stop posting Catwoman, for the love of everyone that posts here, just stop it.

It's too cruel to remind us of that.
 
SSJmole said:
I didn't say they were but the thread is Marvel's movies vs DC's. The Punisher is not a superhero movie but It's still a Marvel movie though.


But from list more than 4.

  • Batman Begins (since people count it as one)
  • Superman Returns
  • Catwoman
  • v for vendetta (if batman counts this does)
  • Constantine
  • The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

that's 6!
Click to expand...
you were responding to Planet-Man's post where he said Super-Hero Movies, so :p
 
I really don't think that the original Batman was all that good. Seriously the last time I watched it I feel asleep. But I still think DC has had three extraordinary films with the first two Superman movies and Batman Begins. And Superman Returns and Batman Forever were both enjoyable.
 
I think if this debate is going to continue we should stop talking about the subjective determination of whether a movie is "good" or "bad" and rather, whether a movie was successful or not (as well as examine that success beyond U.S. domestic box office).
 
SSJmole said:
I didn't say they were but the thread is Marvel's movies vs DC's. The Punisher is not a superhero movie but It's still a Marvel movie though.


But from list more than 4.

  • Batman Begins (since people count it as one)
  • Superman Returns
  • Catwoman
  • v for vendetta (if batman counts this does)
  • Constantine
  • The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

that's 6!
Click to expand...

I think the line has to be drawn based on which "universe" the movies are derived from. Movies from the Vertigo imprint don't count, because they stand on the value of the merit of one to a handful of small creators, rather on the collected continuity of years and years of mish-mash storytelling. We should stick to franchises that stand in the "DC Universe" or "Marvel Universe" proper.
 
Zombipanda said:
I think the line has to be drawn based on which "universe" the movies are derived from. Movies from the Vertigo imprint don't count, because they stand on the value of the merit of one to a handful of small creators, rather on the collected continuity of years and years of mish-mash storytelling. We should stick to franchises that stand in the "DC Universe" or "Marvel Universe" proper.
Click to expand...

I agree but I didn't want to be the one to say it
 
Zombipanda said:
afraid of getting blacklisted, eh?
Click to expand...

terrified

I was also gonna say, we should probably stick to the modern era of super-hero movie (more or less everything after Blade),

cause nobody is talking about Captain America, The Punisher, Nick Fury: Agen of Shield, and the various Hulk movies that were extensions of the TV show
 
Gemini said:
terrified

I was also gonna say, we should probably stick to the modern era of super-hero movie (more or less everything after Blade),

cause nobody is talking about Captain America, The Punisher, Nick Fury: Agen of Shield, and the various Hulk movies that were extensions of the TV show
Click to expand...

But that would mean you'd have to exclude Tim Burton's Batman and Richard Donner's Superman (which, along with Spider-Man and X-Men, seem to reaffirm Jon Favreau's assertion that comic franchises can only feasibly sustain two films). Punisher, I think, came out after Blade. And Nick Fury/Hulk were all TV-budget movies, and probably don't belong in the same category for that reason.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top