Can The DCEU Ever Be As Successful As The MCU?

[C_Miller]

I'm not sure. I think there's a ton of bad blood from Batman vs. Superman and Justice League and I don't think they'll find much success while they're still playing in that Universe. I loved Wonder Woman and really liked a lot about Aquaman, but I'm a fan of these characters and the DC Universe. But to me, I think the one issue with the DCEU is that they're way more visual based than Marvel. Say what you will about Marvel (and believe me, there's A LOT to say), but I find that they have a much easier time reaching the hearts of what make these characters work while DC is more interested in making the characters badass and look cool.

And that's fine, Comics are a visual medium, but in my opinion you don't make a great case for the general public through that method. To me, the best part of Aquaman was anything involving his mother and father because there was heart and real human emotion in those scenes. And of course there was the No Man's Land scene in Wonder Woman. The main DCEU movies, the ones that should engage the general public are devoid of stuff like that. As much as I loved Wonder Woman and enjoyed Aquaman, I think DC's best best may have been going in an entirely different direction to get the Snyder taste out of People's mouths. Like it or not, Justice League was an embarrassment for Warner Brothers. But here I am excited for every movie on the DC docket, so what do I know?

[Ascended]

It's hard to say, honestly.

The MCU is huge, and it's turned unknown characters into household names. But DC's roster was burned into the DNA of Western (if not global) culture decades ago. People like watching RDJr as Iron Man but we're practically born knowing who Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman are. I think it's easy to look at the success Marvel has had, and underestimate the value of DC's IP catalog. So I think it would "easy" for WB to find real success with DC's characters. The people *want* to like Superman and Flash and Batman and Wonder Woman. We actively want to cheer for those characters because they're such a major part of our culture and heritage. It shouldn't be hard to give audiences enough to cheer for, given our predispositions.

The problem, as always, is behind the scenes. How many times has WB management been shifted since MoS was in production? The MCU has gone ten years under the unifying vision of one person, while a single DC movie might see the people in charge change several times between pre-production and box office.

And I gotta admit; I find it f**king hilarious that WB now thinks the key to success is solo movies with little focus on the shared universe. I was saying that years ago. Marvel needed the gimmick of a shared universe to build hype for their characters, who were C-listers without any real public profile to speak of. DC didn't have that problem and could have made great solo films built on the strength of individual IP's (which they had been doing for friggin decades before the MCU was even a pipe dream in Fiege's mind). But all WB could see was what the competition was doing, with no real thought or understanding for their own properties or the different paths to success they might want/need to travel.

I find it concerning and funny that an idiot business student like me could see what it took WB years and several failed films to recognize.

[DrNewGod]

Frankly no. They might be successful and good movies but Marvel was a cultural phenomenon. That won't happen again because, well, it already did and WB are incapable of not interfering.

The DC movies could overall course correct, be great and make a ton but we won't see a big, interconnected universe that turns out a winner every time that is deeply baked into current pop culture.

I tend to agree with this, especially about Marvel essentially creating the phenomenon of respectfully presenting the source material in a way that appeals to almost everyone, in and out of fandom.

However, (IMO) the most important factor is that Marvel's cinema arm was (and is) run by a comics fan who also happened to be an experienced producer, who basically set everything in motion before Disney's purchase of Marvel. There was one central vision for the entire line that was both realistic from a cinema business standpoint, and from a respect for the material standpoint (at least, in the beginning). When Disney bought Marvel, they did remarkably little meddling with the way that things were going (Indeed, why would they? Things were going great!), and allowed what worked to work. That is not the way WB handled DC's properties at all.

A related thing Marvel had going for it that I don't think gets enough attention was that the expectations for Marvel's performance were way lower back when Iron Man went into production. The projects didn't draw the kind of "help" they would have had anyone known just how well they'd work. By the time the MCU's potential began to become apparent, everybody knew who the credit belonged to at Marvel Studios, so there was a lot less incentive for grasping buggers with no grasp of the source material (or its appeal to the audience) to try claiming a slice of it.

[Johnny]

It's hard to say, honestly.

The MCU is huge, and it's turned unknown characters into household names. But DC's roster was burned into the DNA of Western (if not global) culture decades ago. People like watching RDJr as Iron Man but we're practically born knowing who Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman are. I think it's easy to look at the success Marvel has had, and underestimate the value of DC's IP catalog. So I think it would "easy" for WB to find real success with DC's characters. The people *want* to like Superman and Flash and Batman and Wonder Woman. We actively want to cheer for those characters because they're such a major part of our culture and heritage. It shouldn't be hard to give audiences enough to cheer for, given our predispositions.

The problem, as always, is behind the scenes. How many times has WB management been shifted since MoS was in production? The MCU has gone ten years under the unifying vision of one person, while a single DC movie might see the people in charge change several times between pre-production and box office.

And I gotta admit; I find it f**king hilarious that WB now thinks the key to success is solo movies with little focus on the shared universe. I was saying that years ago. Marvel needed the gimmick of a shared universe to build hype for their characters, who were C-listers without any real public profile to speak of. DC didn't have that problem and could have made great solo films built on the strength of individual IP's (which they had been doing for friggin decades before the MCU was even a pipe dream in Fiege's mind). But all WB could see was what the competition was doing, with no real thought or understanding for their own properties or the different paths to success they might want/need to travel.

I find it concerning and funny that an idiot business student like me could see what it took WB years and several failed films to recognize.

Beautiful.

[C_Miller]

It's hard to say, honestly.

The MCU is huge, and it's turned unknown characters into household names. But DC's roster was burned into the DNA of Western (if not global) culture decades ago. People like watching RDJr as Iron Man but we're practically born knowing who Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman are. I think it's easy to look at the success Marvel has had, and underestimate the value of DC's IP catalog. So I think it would "easy" for WB to find real success with DC's characters. The people *want* to like Superman and Flash and Batman and Wonder Woman. We actively want to cheer for those characters because they're such a major part of our culture and heritage. It shouldn't be hard to give audiences enough to cheer for, given our predispositions.

The problem, as always, is behind the scenes. How many times has WB management been shifted since MoS was in production? The MCU has gone ten years under the unifying vision of one person, while a single DC movie might see the people in charge change several times between pre-production and box office.

And I gotta admit; I find it f**king hilarious that WB now thinks the key to success is solo movies with little focus on the shared universe. I was saying that years ago. Marvel needed the gimmick of a shared universe to build hype for their characters, who were C-listers without any real public profile to speak of. DC didn't have that problem and could have made great solo films built on the strength of individual IP's (which they had been doing for friggin decades before the MCU was even a pipe dream in Fiege's mind). But all WB could see was what the competition was doing, with no real thought or understanding for their own properties or the different paths to success they might want/need to travel.

I find it concerning and funny that an idiot business student like me could see what it took WB years and several failed films to recognize.

Completely agree. The only thing I'm a little upset by is that they're still using Snyder's vision as a springboard for the movies. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman, but I'm not really into the Momoa Aquaman and I absolutely HATED the Ezra Miller Flash, which is allegedly getting its own movie. I think the further we get from Batman vs. Superman and Justice League, the more success these movies will find.

[SiegePerilous02]

I'm gonna be so annoyed if we (most likely) lost Cavill, but might be keeping Miller.

[Comic-Reader Lad]

I've liked the DCEU casting, so I have no problem with any of them. Ezra Miller is fine as an actor choice -- just needs to be re-toned to be more Flash-like.

As far as being as successful as the MCU, I don't know about that, but I do know that it doesn't matter. The goal for DCEU right now is to make movies that are widely accepted and beloved. It's the perception of the DCEU that needs to be changed. Once everyone loves the DCEU, the general public isn't going to analyze box office.

And, yes, I do have a lot of confidence that with Aquaman, Shazam, and Wonder Woman 1984, the perception of the DCEU will be changed. That will be enough.

[Ascended]

Completely agree. The only thing I'm a little upset by is that they're still using Snyder's vision as a springboard for the movies. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman, but I'm not really into the Momoa Aquaman and I absolutely HATED the Ezra Miller Flash, which is allegedly getting its own movie. I think the further we get from Batman vs. Superman and Justice League, the more success these movies will find.

That doesn't bother me, really. In fact, I like that WB is (was) trying to take a different approach in tone than what the competition was doing, and I think the juxtaposition of the DC characters, who are all strongly established within certain mythic archetypes, being put in a setting that so closely mirrors our own was intriguing. It's basically exploring the idea of gods walking back into the world as it is today, and that's an interesting way to approach the DCU that sets it apart from everyone else. On paper, it doesn't sound too bad. Maybe not the way everyone would want to approach the characters, but its a valid approach in theory.

But the trick to pulling that off is to make sure your heroes remain as noble and purely good in the film as they are in the comic. Superman's light should burn even brighter against the darker backdrop of the real world, yknow? Now, the hero can still struggle, make mistakes, have doubts, whatever, but their moral compass has to be clearly, unarguably, pointing true north. The world can be shades of gray but the hero and the villain need to be stark white and black. And the DCEU hasn't been able to pull that off very often.

That said, if WB want to get away from Snyder it's almost certainly good business. DC has lost a lot of goodwill and interest over their mismanagement and a clear and obvious change of pace wouldn't hurt at all. I only hope they realize that they dont have to explain it or do anything about it. There's no need for a Crisis movie that reboots or retcons the previous films. That's a huge mistake in comics and it'd be a multi-million dollar mistake in film. If you wanna get away from Snyder, then just make the next movie differently. Hell, the next Superman film could be set in the 40's and take a more Golden Age approach and WB doesn't have to justify sh*t to anyone.

[Ascended]

I've liked the DCEU casting, so I have no problem with any of them. Ezra Miller is fine as an actor choice -- just needs to be re-toned to be more Flash-like.

I gotta admit; I didn't love Miller as Barry. But I think you're right; it was the script and direction, not the actor. The casting for the DCEU has, largely, been really gods damn good.

Hell, even Affleck isn't a bad Batman. It's hard to be actively *bad* at playing Batman (although WB has somehow managed to do just that a few times!). All you gotta do is growl, brood, hit the gym for six months and have a good chin.

Mamoa is an odd choice for Aquaman, but let's be honest; Orin needed that kind of high profile, popular, sex-appeal actor to help overcome the public's image of him.

As far as being as successful as the MCU, I don't know about that, but I do know that it doesn't matter. The goal for DCEU right now is to make movies that are widely accepted and beloved. It's the perception of the DCEU that needs to be changed. Once everyone loves the DCEU, the general public isn't going to analyze box office.

And, yes, I do have a lot of confidence that with Aquaman, Shazam, and Wonder Woman 1984, the perception of the DCEU will be changed. That will be enough.

The good news for WB is that audiences seem to have a short memory. The bad news is that comic fans dont, and we love to bitch online, even at places "normal" people go, and we can have an adverse impact on the box office if we try real hard (I think we impacted JL, honestly).

Ultimately I think WB/DC could make successful, strong films that are much loved by audiences. But I dunno if they're ever going to hit the level Marvel has in film. The MCU really is a huge cultural movement. But in the grand scheme of things, its only been ten years. Clark and Bruce were getting movies decades ago. I think a big deciding factor will be how successful the MCU remains once Downy and Evans and co. are gone. If the MCU can thrive without those names, DC will never catch up.

[babybats]

If anything, I think the success of the MCU has paved the way for DC to make movies they never would've been able to before. If movies like GotG and Ant-Man exist, then why not Aquaman or Shazam? General audiences are primed for the superhero genre and connected universes. All DC has to do now is make good movies.

I think that's the key to the MCU's success. People keep going to see those movies because they know they're probably going to be good or at least enjoyable. They're not all home runs, but none of them are train wrecks. There's a consistency of quality there that is missing with the DCEU and audiences know it.

Whether they can reach the height of the MCU is kind of unfair because what Marvel is doing is unprecedented and ridiculous. I'm not sure if the DCEU is going to be able to make 20 interconnected movies that all do well in the box office, and that's ok. They don't need to be able to do that to be a success.

[dietrich]

DC isn't innovative are reactionary [still] and doesn't have a big vision [personal opinions based on their actions and choices]

If I were a betting guy I would not bet on DC. Goddamit still salty that Into the Spiderverse somehow managed to introduce legacy character so easily while Titans is still pushing Dick Grayson as Robin when we should all be getting to know Dickbats by now.

I'm sure the next Batman movie will make money and Aquaman is smashing but no I don't believe DCEU will ever be as Successful as the CU. Now if WB decides to build a Batman Universe that might rival the MCU since little known fact after the release of Infinity Wars Batman was still worth more than the entire MCU.

At the end of the day I'm not too bothered about the movies [I've actual only seen a few comicbook movies at the cinema]. I like comic books. It means more to me that I have regular reading material than a couple movies ever few years.

[NeathBlue]

Yes of course it can, but it’ll need to keep producing films of the very top quality to do so... Marvel can afford the odd dud here and there due to its rich back catalogue.

One thing that could cause the MCU to become less successful, is what the public will make of it once the likes of Chris Evans, Robert Downey jnr etc, have retired and new actors take their roles... That’ll likely be their biggest test.

[DrNewGod]

One thing that could cause the MCU to become less successful, is what the public will make of it once the likes of Chris Evans, Robert Downey jnr etc, have retired and new actors take their roles... That’ll likely be their biggest test.

If Ant-Man and Guardian of the Galaxy had not been the successes that they were, I might agree with you. Those two films were both virtually independent of the MCU as it existed up to their sequels (I know, but you could have removed Thanos from GotG, and both The SHIELD and The Falcon sequences from Ant-Man and not even have felt it).

The MCU will unquestionably be different when the three foundational actors bow out. I don't see the MCU falling apart without them. At this point, the only two things that I can see damaging the MCU are:

1. Disney beginning to meddle ala WB, resulting in bad films, or
2. The consumer's interest in superheroes simply petering out.

[NeathBlue]

If Ant-Man and Guardian of the Galaxy had not been the successes that they were, I might agree with you. Those two films were both virtually independent of the MCU as it existed up to their sequels (I know, but you could have removed Thanos from GotG, and both The SHIELD and The Falcon sequences from Ant-Man and not even have felt it).

The MCU will unquestionably be different when the three foundational actors bow out. I don't see the MCU falling apart without them. At this point, the only two things that I can see damaging the MCU are:

1. Disney beginning to meddle ala WB, resulting in bad films, or
2. The consumer's interest in superheroes simply petering out.

It’s probably a good bet that Disney will meddle somewhat, how much depends to be seen...
Yes Ant-Man and Guardians have been huge successes, but Marvel films still have their original actors there, and it’s not till they’ve gone will we see if their departure has a knock on effect.

[Aahz]

Ant-Man wasn't such a big success financially. It had the lowest world wide total of all Mavel moves that were produced under Disney.