Why are DC's minority character's lagging behind Marvel's?

[QUOTE=Aahz;5046299]When it comes to Black Panther I doubt that DC can replicate the hype around that movie, and I'm not even sure if Marvel can do that with the sequel. Black Panther was a big deal because it was the first Black lead Movie in the MCU, but only one movie can be the first, and DCEU is simply not as big and popular as the MCU.
I'm not even sure if they are even continuing with a shared cinematic universe for DC (at least in a form where you have a strong connection between the different movies).[/QUOTE]

I hate when people have to add that little footnote 'in the MCU'. DC will never be able to replicate that, because DC is NOT the MCU. Only the MCU is MCU and apparently that's all that really matters. Black Panther was never the first black lead show... or the first Black led superhero.... There have been others. Just off the top of my head, I remember Blade, 2, 3, Spawn, Steel, Catwoman.... Some where good... some were utter garbage, but 'black led' wasn't an issue till the MCU started a combined universe.

Honestly, I liked Blade a lot better than Black Panther. I found that movie really boring. The way he had to fight to get his super powers... and then loses his super powers... and has to get his super powers back... after he already appeared in Civil War WITH his super powers... It just got redundant and made 'The Black Panther' seem like a switch that gets turned on and off all the time.

Frankly it was lot like Dark Knight Rises... which i hated. It should have been called 'The dark knight rises two or three times then quits'.


[QUOTE=Will Evans;5045063]Especially since Tony Stark, Black Panther, Beast, Hank Pym, Reed Richards, and Bruce Banner all first appeared as master geniuses.

Moon Girl, Nadia Pym, Val Richards (as she is now) and Riri were all made because Marvel realized they had no heroic female geniuses like those above.

LetÂ’s not forget characters like John Henry Irons and Kyle Rayner were just strangers too.[/QUOTE]

For me, that's a much better way to do it though. The men started out as ADULTS. They've got their training, they've go their hard worked for degrees. They may have even been the smartest people in their schools when they were kids, but they didnt' break into einsteins garage and fix his equations. There is at least an implied backstory of hard work and training to get to where they are. They just didn't get any major breakthrough or inevitable lab accident that made them full fledged 'heroes'. Until they have that instigating incident... they really are 'background specialists that would show up when needed.' Adults can get away with that... Genius children are a lot tougher to accept.


[QUOTE=kurenai24;5045045]The fact that you have hatred for a comic book character just on the basis that she wasn't introduced in the way that you like and/or the writers didn't do your idea(s) is an issue all into itself; I mean you don't even see the irony in you expressing the OTT anger you have for this character and the OTT anger usually reserved for characters of color for the most mundane things, and believe me the reasons you have for hating, not disliking, but hating the character is mundane, irrational, and juvenile.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. 90% of a character is entirely based on the stories they are in. If the stories they are in suck, and the characters are out of character, and the plot doesn't make any sense... why would you NOT hate that character? It's not about the race, the gender, the politics or anything else.... it's literally because the writer didn't write a good story. That seems competely legit to me.

Someone mentioned John Henry irons above. By contrast... i loved his early appearances. collected all his reign of Superman stuff and probably a year or so of his solo. The difference is the origin. He was also a genius inventor who had a complicated backstory of how he was able to build his armor... including degrees in engineering, but he didn't have any connection to Superman at all. He didn't get his blessing, he didn't wear his costume or use his gear... He wore the symbol because superman was dead and he wanted to do some good to pay him back. There was nothing about this that was out of character for Superman, he was out of the equation. Had RiRi been more like that? Designing her own suit and having zero contact with Tony or Stark enterprises... and actually an adult genius, I would have found her much better. But as it is? yeah, hated that character from first story.

[QUOTE] It's not about the race, the gender, the politics or anything else.... it's literally because the writer didn't write a good story. That seems competely legit to me. [/QUOTE]

When folks especially those who DON'T read the books-don't care for the character because of race or gender or sexuality-that is not the fault of the writer.




[QUOTE]where's his Marvel Rising special and novels?[/QUOTE]

If you don't have editors asking or looking for pitches that happens.

[QUOTE=skyvolt2000;5046751]If you don't have editors asking or looking for pitches that happens.[/QUOTE]
Does that have anything to do with Marvel Rising? I also assume the publishing side is different from the comics side.

[QUOTE=Steel Inquisitor;5045729]Nothing is safe in Hollywood, they've failed Superman for years. C-list characters don't become A-listers by sitting on the shelf, work needs to be put in, they need to be respected and they need WB's proper backing to do it. Marvel believe in Guardians, WB won't do that for Static.[/QUOTE]

It doesn’t help that DC executives have probably seen the backlash characters like Black Panther and Captain Marvel get from certain corners of the fandom and thus shy away from truly elevating their diverse characters the way their competition does. DC (and its fans) have no issue pushing Mr Terrific or Black Lightning as the leads in team ongoings but the second they get put in a solo context there’s automatic concerns about “pandering”, “SJWs”, and how “no one asked for this”.

Marvel can roll with the punches in a way DC hasn’t shown me they can. Now that seems to be changing with them putting out stuff like Far Sector despite some of the initial push back it got, but creating more minority characters that are entrenched in other franchises only does so much. I mean Nubia is great but it’d be even better to see Vixen get some sort of book. As great as John Stewart is we all know he’s never going to be the sole lead of a Green Lantern film.

K Jones was right in saying DC lacks diverse characters with the sense of history DC’s A-listers have. The key to elevating diverse characters lies in propping up your originals who can stand on their own and operate as equals. Marvel did it with Black Panther and has been putting in the work since the late 90’s with the Priest revival.

[QUOTE]There have been others. Just off the top of my head, I remember Blade, 2, 3, Spawn, Steel, Catwoman.... Some where good... some were utter garbage, but 'black led' wasn't an issue till the MCU started a combined universe. [/QUOTE]


Yes there have been others UNLIKE Black Panther-did not have a HUGE budget spent on them.
Blade was not under the MCU banner when it came out.


Here is why Black Panther is held in high regard despite every gator, troll, self hating black person, entitlement fan and others fought to make that movie fail.

This was the first non straight white male lead film where a company FULLY INVESTED in.

Investment as in not just a movie. We saw MERCHANDISE-not some happy meal figure that Static got or a Hard to find in black areas toy line like Steel or Spawn or a Barbie like Catwoman.

We saw action figures from the movie.
We saw books from the movie and mainstream Marvel. Shuri is on her second novel. We have books on Panther for every age level.
We saw Halloween costumes
We saw Valentines
We saw Christmas wrap
We saw greeting cards
We saw toothbrush, body wash, socks, shirts and more.
We have 3 Black Panther Hot Toys
We saw spinoffs in Shuri, Killmonger and the Doras.

Marvel put their money where their mouth is. Then they did it again with Miles (Sony did).

This is the investment folks are talking about.

There’s also the fact that Black Panther, unlike Steel, Blade, & Spawn, was with a predominately black cast.

[QUOTE=skyvolt2000;5046774]Yes there have been others UNLIKE Black Panther-did not have a HUGE budget spent on them.
Blade was not under the MCU banner when it came out.


Here is why Black Panther is held in high regard despite every gator, troll, self hating black person, entitlement fan and others fought to make that movie fail.

This was the first non straight white male lead film where a company FULLY INVESTED in.

Investment as in not just a movie. We saw MERCHANDISE-not some happy meal figure that Static got or a Hard to find in black areas toy line like Steel or Spawn or a Barbie like Catwoman.

We saw action figures from the movie.
We saw books from the movie and mainstream Marvel. Shuri is on her second novel. We have books on Panther for every age level.
We saw Halloween costumes
We saw Valentines
We saw Christmas wrap
We saw greeting cards
We saw toothbrush, body wash, socks, shirts and more.
We have 3 Black Panther Hot Toys
We saw spinoffs in Shuri, Killmonger and the Doras.

Marvel put their money where their mouth is. Then they did it again with Miles (Sony did).

This is the investment folks are talking about.[/QUOTE]

The cast was also majority black except for like 2 people which people loved seeing.

[QUOTE=skyvolt2000;5046774]Yes there have been others UNLIKE Black Panther-did not have a HUGE budget spent on them.
Blade was not under the MCU banner when it came out.


Here is why Black Panther is held in high regard despite every gator, troll, self hating black person, entitlement fan and others fought to make that movie fail.

This was the first non straight white male lead film where a company FULLY INVESTED in.

Investment as in not just a movie. We saw MERCHANDISE-not some happy meal figure that Static got or a Hard to find in black areas toy line like Steel or Spawn or a Barbie like Catwoman.

We saw action figures from the movie.[/QUOTE]

Hard to find?? honestly, for what they were, except for that Blade with all the weapons, most of these were peg warmers that hit heavy discounts at ToysRus. I only saw that particular Blade... who i referred to as 'Loaded for Bear Blade' once.... but Whistler and and the other 'less weaponed' Blade i saw forever. Though once i knew 'loaded for bear' existed, I didn't WANT the one without the weapons. f

But the point is, they DID get figures... and if the movies were a bit better, they probably would have sold more. It's hard to compare 1990's marketing machine with the 2020 marketing machine.. but they still existed. But a lot of these were pre-internet/ebay/BBTS so they were in actual physical stores. And honestly, for rated R movies like Blade... and in concept Spawn... the fact that they were in the local walmarts and Targets means the companies WERE pushing for them.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]98659[/ATTACH]
[IMG]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/LYcAAOSwSwleMMzD/s-l400.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://designbyelena.com/ebay/AuctionImages/blade-blade-1.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://thecollectorscantina.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/img_25571.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Will Evans;5046807]There’s also the fact that Black Panther, unlike Steel, Blade, & Spawn, was with a predominately black cast.[/QUOTE]

I'm always a bit confused between 'predominately black cast' and 'Blaxplotation'. There was a push before to create some black stars and they made some pretty awesome movies. But whenever you mention them the consensus is 'That was blaxplotation, that doesn't count!' Honestly not sure where that line is drawn. Even at it's best Marvel/Disney/WB/whoever will always be about making as much money as possible and doing what they can to do it. Black Panther promoted black actors and black characters...and made a cool Billion dollars doing it. Just don't see what the difference is between Shaft and Blacula and modern movies that do the same thing.

Had the marketing been about a cool Avenger we hadn't seen before and come for a great adventure.... and he just happens to be Black, the same way Guardians was advertised as an exciting adventure and one happens to be a tree man... it could be different. But there was a huge push that this is THE Black hero and the first time it's ever been done, with a black cast for a black audience and if you're black they you GOT to see this show!!! and let's rent busses to get everyone to see it!! It just feels... manipulative.

It’s honestly strange to see people trying to discredit the accomplishments of Black Panther like that’s relevant to why DC’s diverse characters are on most measures lacking in comparison to Marvel’s (in terms of investment). Black Panther was the first modern, big budget black superhero movie, also featuring a predominantly black cast and highlighting African culture, which doesn’t get the best depiction in Western media to put it lightly.

It being in the MCU, the biggest pop cultural phenomenon of the century also fueled the popularity, as did the fact there was a massive marketing push entirely unprecedented for a non-white character. Unlike Blade or Spawn Black Panther was marketed as an all ages type film that also included all of the standard MCU perks of getting on the big screen (easily accessible toys and associated merch).

People who act like Black Panther was the first black superhero movie are wrong and need to get over themselves. But people who want to downplay or discredit the industry firsts Black Panther brought to the table are equally delusional and need to just admit they don’t care for the movie instead of making up reasons for why it’s “not a big deal”.

[QUOTE=phantom1592;5046703]I hate when people have to add that little footnote 'in the MCU'. [/QUOTE]But in the End it comes down to that, without the MCU beeing the "biggest franchise in the world" Black Panther wouldn't have been such a big deal, and without a functioning cinematic universe DC it will be much harder for DC to get people to see movies about their more obscure characters.

If they would make an "all black" Black Lighting, Steel or Vixen movie, there is a good chance it would end up like the "all female" Birds of Prey movie.

[QUOTE=Aahz;5046948]But in the End it comes down to that, without the MCU beeing the "biggest franchise in the world" Black Panther wouldn't have been such a big deal, and without a functioning cinematic universe DC it will be much harder for DC to get people to see movies about their more obscure characters.

If they would make an "all black" Black Lighting, Steel or Vixen movie, there is a good chance it would end up like the "all female" Birds of Prey movie.[/QUOTE]

people do realize that Birds of Prey didn't bomb, right? it just didn't break a ba-gillion records and it's still objectively one of the better if not one of the best DC movies they've put out. the bar for greenlighting good representation shouldn't be "will it break and million records and make 15 trillion dollars" everytime. Dwayne McDuffie explained it beautifully YEEEEARS ago and people still are falling into the same trap of hyper-rationalizing every move for diversity; especially at DC. Marvel will pull a random obscure character out of their ass and make a movie because they have a formula to make good movies that make money, they aren't just cash grabbing all the time. how bout we just pick the best people of color and other marginalized groups for these films (in front and behind the camera) and let them to make a good movie. that's actual representation. people are too stuck on the milestones, but milestones and some tokens here or there is not the same as diversity or progressive representation.

[QUOTE=9th.;5046809]The cast was also majority black except for like 2 people which people loved seeing.[/QUOTE]

Oh hell, I giggled like the white fool that I am when I saw that poster and the only white faces were Bilbo and Gollum, 'cause my first thought was 'It's the Tolkien white guys!'

[QUOTE=lemonpeace;5046962]people do realize that Birds of Prey didn't bomb, right? [/QUOTE]It made 202 million against a budget of 84.5 million.
The usual assumption is that a movie has to make roughly 3 times it's budget to break even, that would have been around 50 millions more.

And it was by far the lowest grossing DCEU movie sofar.

EDIT: Based on this [URL="https://variety.com/2020/film/box-office/birds-of-prey-box-office-disappoints-1203498018/"]article[/URL] it might have even needed 300 Millions to break even.

[QUOTE=Aahz;5046991]It made 202 million against a budget of 84.5 million.
The usual assumption is that a movie has to make roughly 3 times it's budget to break even, that would have been around 50 millions more.

And it was by far the lowest grossing DCEU movie sofar.

EDIT: Based on this [URL="https://variety.com/2020/film/box-office/birds-of-prey-box-office-disappoints-1203498018/"]article[/URL] it might have even needed 300 Millions to break even.[/QUOTE]

no one knows how true that whole Hollywood multiplier rule works, it always switches from double, to triple, I've even heard as high as quadruple the budget is the rule of thumb; these are estimations with the mindset usually catered to the idea of blockbusters. Birds of Prey isn't a blockbuster, it was being reported in such a way in the hopes it would do Deadpool numbers but Deadpool is not the norm. It's the same problem DC had with Justice League, they are aiming too high for no reason. Why should a film be expected to be exceptional to justify it's existence as a film with a diverse cast and/or that leans heavily into more inclusive representation. Birds of Prey is not some smash hit but to call it a flop or anything of the like would be a stretch. DC and Warner are a massive company and the DCEU is still a massive franchise, a low gross for that is relative compared to a standard movie, if we're talking about losses Justice League and Batman v Superman are bigger and more significant misses than Bird of Prey objectively.

That's what I'm saying, everyone wants to say representation matters but then when it's time for the representation we gotta jump through these elaborate hyper-rationalized obtuse reasons why they can't actually do the representation thing like that because because. BvS underperformed and we're still getting another Batman and no matter what white-led or white male-centric superhero movie bombs, that won't stop them from making all of the most obscure white guy superhero movies. If DC wants the clout tokens for representation then they need to commit to what representation means, and it doesn't mean these things can only happen if it's exceptional.