Can The DCEU Ever Be As Successful As The MCU?

[Johnny]

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.

I think the Ant-Man films are relatively less expensive and they are doing well for the type of movies they are. They're heist/comedy/duo-lead type films about lesser known characters. Any movie about that type of material crossing north of 600M is a success in my book. Besides, one can argue they could've done better with the promotion for the sequel. I think Marvel should've made it a bigger deal that their first female character that technically got her own movie was Wasp, not Captain Marvel. It was a co-lead role, but it still came out before CM and they didn't really capitalize on that.

[RobinFan4880]

Of course DC could become as popular as Marvel in the realm of cinema.

The problem is that the higher ups at the WB do not know why DC characters are popular or how to leverage their characters to make great films. The higher ups also do not know whom to entrust the keys to the kingdom to (i.e. Zack Snyder was not the right man for the job). They also want to jump from nothing to billion dollar movies, conveniently forgetting that Marvel spent years developing its various heroes before jumping into the billion dollar Avengers film.

The WB just needs someone like Kevin Feige to take the reigns of the various film franchises and oversee the long term planning and development over the DCEU.

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.

Ant-Man is above Thor 1, Cap 1 and Hulk 1. It is definitely the lowest of the newer movies but even then, it made half a billion dollars even though its production had a lot of problems (with a director quitting and a new one coming on, etc.). Ant-Man does not make gobs of money but it does make a profit and serves as a nice pallet cleanser from some of the more serious-ish marvel movies.

[RobinFan4880]

Double post, sorry.

[lemonpeace]

Marvel is just operating on a different level to really be compared to DC and DC's IP isn't as suited towards today's popular culture as Marvel. Marvel's approach to comics has been more grounded and diverse as oppose who do more mythic and archetypal. Film audiences like to watch themselves in the characters rather than seminal archetypes like Batman and Superman. Marvel's comics clearly play off the movies and vice versa and that benefits them. DC can be about as popular overall in the global market because on a whole people love big shit and you don't get bigger than DC IP-wise. I don't see them being as big from a cultural aspect until they take more risk as a whole and dig into a more holistic intimate approach to storytelling. However, they won't take that risk because they are still somewhat trying to compete with Marvel so they keep making choices in the movies that feel cheap for the sake of scale. However, Aquaman and Wonder Woman are steps in the right direction. So if half of the films they've announced actually go through AND they learn nail them with tangible characters, DC should be able to be in a serious conversation in relation to Marvel culturally.

Also, with Spiderverse and Venom, they've proven that Marvel IP being split up in different studios (only two now but who knows how they'll go) actually works toward their benefit too.

[Aahz]

Ant-Man is above Thor 1, Cap 1 and Hulk 1.

Those 3 movies were not produced by Disney.

And while Ant-Man was a success it was not on a level that is really above the level of what DC Movies can achieve, Aquaman has for example already made more money than Antman at this point.

The Movies that crossed the Billon Dollar mark have apart from Black Panther, all stared the "first wave characters" and I'm not sure if the hype around Black Panther can be really reproduced with any other character, so I think it is possible that the MCU might see a decline in Box Office once the original Avengers retire.

[mace11]

DC can be about as popular overall in the global market because on a whole people love big shit and you don't get bigger than DC IP-wise.

I disagree.
This view is outdated by the way.
Marvel has more cosmic books out there then dc,more so these days and more characters then dc looking at wiki and comicvine list for both companies.
X-men and the ff are coming back to Disney marvel too for the live action movies and marvel mcu going more cosmic.
They are talks for a nova movie for example.

Marvel has more superheroes and more gods then dc.
Marvel has more more alien races then dc like aspirants,celestials,the beyonders,the watchers,technarchy etc..

Note-marvel always had the rights for live action shows for the x-men and ff by the way.

Here is something else.
DC more overpowered then current marvel?
by Gabriel Carrasco3 weeks ago quote-

I don't know about that dude. Because both Marvel and DC have OP characters. Franklin Richards, Marquise of Death, Scarlett Witch, Molecule Man are all universal or multiversal reality warpers that could take out a vast amount of the DC Universe as well as the Marvel Universe. Both comics have ridiculously strong. Only fanboys of either comic universe disregard the strength of DC or Marvel.

Check this out too.
Why are marvel speedsters so terrible?
https://community.cbr.com/showthread...terrible/page6
and
https://community.cbr.com/showthread...rs-so-terrible

[mace11]

Those 3 movies were not produced by Disney.

They are still mcu movies.

so I think it is possible that the MCU might see a decline in Box Office once the original Avengers retire.

We will see.

[mib86]

Honestly,i dont know.
The best achievement of MCU was to bind the public at the Marvel's brand istead rather than creating a franchise of every single hero.
In this way even the less successful movies dont risk to flop and people give a chance at the most bizzarre and obuscure characters ("a movie about a talking racoon,a tree,two green peoples and some guy with a strange mask?why not?it's Marvel!")
Can the DC/Warner do the same?At the moment the DC Brand dont seem so healty an they have chose to begin their universe with some pretty divisive movie

Another problem of the dc/warner it's they dont risk and they dont try to use the more peculiars traits of their comics world before the Marvel.
They waited so much to do a legacy hero(like Nigthwing) that marvel used that idea for the Antman's movie first and they waited so much to do a Flashpoint movie that the marvel used the parallel earths idea to do Spiderverse first...
We will need to see first a Novacorps movie before to see a true Green Lantern Corp movie?

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Marvel is just operating on a different level to really be compared to DC and DC's IP isn't as suited towards today's popular culture as Marvel. Marvel's approach to comics has been more grounded and diverse as oppose who do more mythic and archetypal. Film audiences like to watch themselves in the characters rather than seminal archetypes like Batman and Superman. Marvel's comics clearly play off the movies and vice versa and that benefits them. DC can be about as popular overall in the global market because on a whole people love big shit and you don't get bigger than DC IP-wise. I don't see them being as big from a cultural aspect until they take more risk as a whole and dig into a more holistic intimate approach to storytelling. However, they won't take that risk because they are still somewhat trying to compete with Marvel so they keep making choices in the movies that feel cheap for the sake of scale. However, Aquaman and Wonder Woman are steps in the right direction. So if half of the films they've announced actually go through AND they learn nail them with tangible characters, DC should be able to be in a serious conversation in relation to Marvel culturally.

Also, with Spiderverse and Venom, they've proven that Marvel IP being split up in different studios (only two now but who knows how they'll go) actually works toward their benefit too.

I think that’s a mistake to make those assumptions. The idea that there’s this fundamental difference between DC and Marvel just in their DNA is just, from my perspective, wholly outdated. Does DC have characters that fill a mythic archetypal role? Yes. But Marvel has those as well. A lot. Captain America in the Marvel Universe fills pretty much the same role as Superman in the DC Universe. And actually, the Spider-Man mythos contains a lot of the same elements that the Batman mythos does: the mystery of his secret identity, heavily influenced by personal tragedy, the disdain from certain sectors of the population, and similar rogues galleries to boot. Plus, Spider-Man is about as mythic in the public consciousness as Batman is.

Marvel and DC are so much more similar than people want to admit. The only difference between their cinematic universes was that Marvel Studios had a singular creative influence driving everything. DC did not.

[lemonpeace]

I disagree.
This view is outdated by the way.
Marvel has more cosmic books out there then dc,more so these days and more characters then dc looking at wiki and comicvine list for both companies.
X-men and the ff are coming back to Disney marvel too for the live action movies and marvel mcu going more cosmic.
They are talks of a nova movie.

It's not about cosmic vs Street level or OPness, there are no heroes bigger than DC heroes. Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, The Flash, etc, their premier heroes are the biggest names; they're archetypes. Look at their movies, they make stupid amounts of money globally in comparison to regular films based on the fact that they're DC. Superman and Batman are literally as recognizable as Jesus. Marvel is definitely having a moment right now because they have changed the game and they're with the times. They're introducing and focusing on characters that key into today's sensiblities. They definitely changing the game but their names aren't that level of icon (yet).

[mace11]

It's not about cosmic vs Street level or OPness, there are no heroes bigger than DC heroes. Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, The Flash, etc, their premier heroes are the biggest names; they're archetypes. Look at their movies, they make stupid amounts of money globally in comparison to regular films based on the fact that they're DC. Superman and Batman are literally as recognizable as Jesus. Marvel is definitely having a moment right now because they have changed the game and they're with the times. They're introducing and focusing on characters that key into today's sensiblities. They definitely changing the game but their names aren't that level of icon (yet).

Here some other views about this.

Justice League Box Office heading for Disappointing Weekend

Galaxy Trippin9 hours ago
It's time to admit that the DC characters are no longer the most loved.

M.C9 hours ago
Galaxy Trippin
Their characters still are but their cinematic universe is hated

anthony cheesman9 hours ago
The characters are great the studio is the issue

Juan Sanchez9 hours ago
That’s the thing people don’t realize. A lot of the people who always talk about DC characters being more iconic are older and aren’t looking at the big picture. There is a lot of younger people who have grown up in a golden age of Marvel cinema, to the point where Marvel characters are everywhere they look. In this sense, I think it’s completely fair to say that to an increasingly large demographic, Marvel characters are considered the most iconic and move beloved.

by yohyoi
justice-league-opening-weekend-box-office-lower-thor-ragnarok
http://deadline.com/2017/11/justice-...ar-1202211094/
Never would I have ever thought this would happen, but it did. DC's most iconic heroes just lost to some Marvel heroes that were unknown decades ago. People like to preach DC has the most iconic heroes in the world, but I think it's changing. We have a new generation who attribute DC heroes to "bad" and "mediocre" movies. Marvel is having its global Renaissance where kids would rather be Thor than Superman, and be Iron Man rather than Batman. WB needs to step up.

Originally Posted by Nardz937 View Post
To spend $300 million on a movie featuring some of the most iconic and loved characters in pop culture and for it to open with less than $100 million is very disappointing.
DC has done some damage.

by Snake
When will people learn that having an "iconic" character in a movie means very little? Batman is iconic to who? To the insignificant percentage of the population that reads comics and love the character? For everyone else he is a well known character, but that's pretty much it. Everyone i know knows who Batman is, but 99% of them still couldn't care less about the character. They might go watch a Batman movie if this specific movie looks appealing enough to them, based on trailers, marketing, actors, reviews. But the simple fact of Batman being in a movie isn't enough to draw them, just like it isn't enough to draw enough people to make over 1B dollars. The number of people for whom the character is iconic isn't enough to make the movie profitable.
Plenty of movies that don't feature "iconic characters" make a lot of money. You present something that's appealing enough and has a good marketing strategy behind and people will wanna see it, regardless of the "iconic characters2 being in it on not.

by Darepool
This guy gets it.
Just because a body builder in Muscle Beach has a giant Superman tattoo on his deltoid doesn't mean he reads the comics, or will be first in line when a Superman film opens. Assuming he sees it at all or even cares. These discussions of 'iconic' only has meaning on fan boards.

Originally Posted by Zur-en-Arrh View Post
At the same time, I think Batman, Spiderman, I don't know, Darth Vader, cross into the realm of characters who do draw box office on name of character alone. Enough to save the day, maybe not. But does a divisive movie like BvS have a prayer for 500 million let alone 800 or so if it doesn't feature a character like Batman?


by Raiden
Exactly. So far in DCEU we have one movie that featured Superman and another movie with the Trinity (Superman, Batman, and WW). Neither of them made over 1B. On the other hand, movies like The Avengers (which was comprised of Marvel's B-list superheroes before TA's success) and IM3 did crossed the milestone. DC's superheroes are indeed iconic, but GA nowadays won't see a movie just because of this reason.

by Superchan
Neither Superman, Batman nor Spiderman (the big three of comicbooks) are immune to box office disappointments if their movies lack quality.
BvS had both superman and batman meeting for the first time yet the film underperformed and made less than a well received homecoming, which featured spiderman alone (with a bit part for Ironman). On the other hand ASM2 underperformed considerably and Sony had to crawl to marvel to help them save the character.
Now a divisive (being generous here) JL film is likely to make less than a well made thor movie.
The reality is the landscape has changed and being well known and iconic means little if the quality isn't there.

by m1ll3r
Zack Snyder will potentially have damaged the Batman brand just as Joel Schumacher did. In very different ways, admittedly, but the damage is done. To take a character that was adored and celebrated with billion earning movies, and reduce him to a player in a derided, underperforming, source of ridicule is a crime.

Jekecy
Way too much spotlight on other heroes for people to dwell on a misstep.
Plus, with a recast looming around the corner, the stench surrounding Ben would be immediately extinguished with a new face. Hit that teaser out the park, and people are easily going to hop on that hype train again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrSxvUc5R6Q

[Ascended]

It’s probably a good bet that Disney will meddle somewhat, how much depends to be seen...

Im not so sure, actually. When Disney bought Marvel the MCU was already well established and successful. And Disney was very vocal about how they had no intention of sticking their fingers in and trying to fix what wasn't broken. And all these years later, from what I can see and what I have heard, the only thing Disney has done is throw more money at Marvel Studios to do with as they see fit. There's been damn little interference that I've heard about, maybe even none.

At this point, if Disney hasn't started meddling with Marvel Studios, I think it is unlikely that they're going to start. If the MCU starts throwing out dud after dud, that'll be different, but as long as they keep on as they have been? Disney would be foolish to start meddling now.

I do agree that the real test will be how the MCU does once the core actors have left. But Marvel has successfully introduced characters since then who could take up those reins, so.....we'll see I guess. I'm honestly not that worried; the MCU has done the impossible time and time again and made Z-list IP's that even comic fans don't care about into globally recognized household names. I dont think the MCU will struggle that much without Downy and Evans but you never know.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

It's not about cosmic vs Street level or OPness, there are no heroes bigger than DC heroes. Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, The Flash, etc, their premier heroes are the biggest names; they're archetypes. Look at their movies, they make stupid amounts of money globally in comparison to regular films based on the fact that they're DC. Superman and Batman are literally as recognizable as Jesus. Marvel is definitely having a moment right now because they have changed the game and they're with the times. They're introducing and focusing on characters that key into today's sensiblities. They definitely changing the game but their names aren't that level of icon (yet).

I don't know if I'd agree with all of that. I mean, yes, Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman...those guys are the icons that everyone and their mom knows and who are instantly recognizable to both comic fans and the entire world populace. But at the same time, so are Spider-Man and the X-Men. Those guys are iconic and everyone in the US, if not the world, knows who they are. I'd even argue that the Hulk and Fantastic Four might also be at that level of fame and recognition. I'd definitely say that those franchises are more well-known than some other characters. That's not to say that they're "better," not at all, but they have been in the public eye in a more visible way, what with them having had several films and TV series to their names.

So, getting back on topic, I'd say that Marvel faced at least some of the same hurdles that you're saying plague DC: tackling the adaptation of super-iconic characters for the big screen.

[Aahz]

They are still mcu movies.

But they came out before the MCU became the success it is now, especially out side of the US.

And my original statement was anyway that Antman is the lowest earining of the Marvel Movies produced by Disney. There for I wanted to point out that the 3 movies RobinFan4880 named were not produced by Disney.

[Killerbee911]

Those 3 movies were not produced by Disney.

And while Ant-Man was a success it was not on a level that is really above the level of what DC Movies can achieve, Aquaman has for example already made more money than Antman at this point.
.

Aquaman got a prime Christmas release , Antman got late summer releases. They aren't trying to highlight Antman what Antman is doing pretty silly which is taking movies with reasonable budgets,solid release dates and marketing and easily making a profit. Let Disney throw its really weight behind Antman or some other project see what happens. Props to Aquaman but Aquaman had a near 200 million budget and about 150 million dollar marketing budget and Christmas season release date.Those are around the same numbers as Avengers 3 for perspective. Last please let not talk about what DC is on level to achieve because they manage to make a Superman and Batman movie and Justice League movie a failures something that should be impossible to do.

It is hilarious think MCU is dependent on "names" at this point that strength of a shared universe is clear, You think Black Panther showing up in Civil War was accident? The strength of shared uni putting characters in public eye who don't get seen. Until MCU put out couple of stinkers they have public trust and way of introducing unknown characters to public. It shouldn't some hard feat to put "fun" "action" filled movie and make a lot of money. Plus once the original avengers retire what you think is happening? Ironman, Captain America, Thor, and Hulk properties are going away? Let's pretend they do retire these characters they still have Spiderman, Black Panther,F4, X-men, Deadpool and Wolverine. Oh yeah they got Blade, Daredevil, Dr Strange, Punisher, Luke Cage, Iron Fist who all are known solid properties to general public now. Aquaman is going hitting near Billion but the MCU is going to struggle to find another solo property to hit Billion. Lol.