Zack Snyder Explains Why DC Movies Can't Be Like Marvel Movies

[The Cool Thatguy]

And I believe it was good for characters like Iron Man no one has ever heard off. MCU suited him.

Spiderman or Batman is a different case.




Superman

Cyborg

...how do you think Snyder uplifted Superman when the character had countless movies prior?

And if he uplifted Cyborg, where's his movie?

[Powerboy]

The claim WB wasn’t chasing or didn’t need to chase the MCU is kind of irrelevant. Regardless of whether one thinks it’s warranted, it happened. It’s not a coincidence that there’d been DC movies for decades, and yet they only decide to create a shared movie universe with crossovers after Iron Man came out and was a huge hit.

That’s not an inherently bad thing; Marvel and DC have been copying the other’s trends from the beginning. But pretending it flat out didn’t happen or that it wasn’t what WB was doing is laughable. I even remember there being interviews around 2009 or so where they flat out said Iron Man convinced them to try to do something similar with Green Lantern.

I think there's no doubt they did a shared universe because Marvel did it and that they tried to do too much too soon to play catch up. In fact, it seems there was a rejected script for "Superman Returns" that had a cameo by Wonder Woman and a mention of Bruce Wayne? But they rejected it. And that was just two years before Iron-Man.

Fans have been suggesting a Superman/ Batman crossover in the movies since at least the Michael Keaton Batman, suggesting a sequel that crosses over with the Chris Reeve Superman, whether played by Reeve or not. Even before the Keaton Batman, there were fan suggestions of doing a Batman crossover as one of the Superman sequels. But the suits rejected it over and over and over as fan nonsense. Then Marvel does it and, suddenly, it's a great idea- once somebody else took the chance and proved it was possible.

DC/ WB had the resources to do it for decades and did not. Marvel did it soon after they had the resources and the tech/ CGI to pull it off. So there's no viable argument that they would have done it if Marvel had not. Nothing, zero, in their movies and plans indicated any inkling of doing it. Everything they planned and did from SR to DK showed they were thinking on an individual movies train of thought.

That doesn't make the DCEU movies bad. But, definitely, Marvel gave them a kick in the @$$ that got them started.

[CosmiComic]

...how do you think Snyder uplifted Superman when the character had countless movies prior?

And if he uplifted Cyborg, where's his movie?

That's WB's fault though too

[Castle]

I think there's no doubt they did a shared universe because Marvel did it and that they tried to do too much too soon to play catch up. In fact, it seems there was a rejected script for "Superman Returns" that had a cameo by Wonder Woman and a mention of Bruce Wayne? But they rejected it. And that was just two years before Iron-Man.

Fans have been suggesting a Superman/ Batman crossover in the movies since at least the Michael Keaton Batman, suggesting a sequel that crosses over with the Chris Reeve Superman, whether played by Reeve or not. Even before the Keaton Batman, there were fan suggestions of doing a Batman crossover as one of the Superman sequels. But the suits rejected it over and over and over as fan nonsense. Then Marvel does it and, suddenly, it's a great idea- once somebody else took the chance and proved it was possible.

DC/ WB had the resources to do it for decades and did not. Marvel did it soon after they had the resources and the tech/ CGI to pull it off. So there's no viable argument that they would have done it if Marvel had not. Nothing, zero, in their movies and plans indicated any inkling of doing it. Everything they planned and did from SR to DK showed they were thinking on an individual movies train of thought.

That doesn't make the DCEU movies bad. But, definitely, Marvel gave them a kick in the @$$ that got them started.

I am happy DC never even made a DCEU 30 years ago even if the concept was on the table. if that had happened. I am not sure the nolan films or their animated films would have taken off.

it goes back to what I said. when you have a very established stand alone universe like the Batman Universe or 10 years of SmallVille, why must you now put all the basket in a shared universe?

[green_garnish]

That's WB's fault though too

perhaps, but I get the impression it's mostly Ray Fischer's fault.

That's not really fair, though. I think if Ray had all the charisma in the world, there would not be a Cyborg movie. That's not WB's fault. No one with any sense believes Cyborg spinoff is a billion dollar franchise.

Castle would have made a better case if he had listed Wonder Woman and Aquaman as Snyder-uplifted characters.

[Powerboy]

It was not necessary for DC to do a shared universe. they felt they had to have one because that was the new thing in Hollywood.

However, DC never needed one. One reason why the shared universe worked well in the MCU was because MCU did not have most of their A list characters. they sold them, they had characters no one cared about originally, so giving them movies and linking them struck an appeal that was quite original but DC never needed to have Superman, Wonder Woman or Batman be in a single movie. it was just not necessary.

I think one user said it best, feature film movies just have a higher calling. MCU needed the MCU for Thor, GOTG, Avengers, Iron Man, Ant Man, Black Panther, Shang CHI

You don't need a DCEU for many DC characters and even all DC characters because WB can artistically do more than Marvel and step out of a safe zone by not having anything connect together.

I would say Marvel's advantages were:

1. As you said, far lesser known characters to the general public. No absolute, pre-conceived notions about who they were or what they would do. So, Iron-Man can get away with killing people. Imagine if Superman was never Clark Kent the way Thor was never Don Blake in the movies? It could not be done.

2. Marvel did it first so they had time to think it out while DC felt rushed and pressured.

3. Marvel characters were mostly designed from the beginning of Marvel Comics to be in a shared universe. Artistically, the DC characters were not originally conceived of as existing in a shared universe and I think work better in their own styles.

4. Good point that one reason DC never tried it before was because they had two big name characters (three if they had seen the potential of Wonder Woman) and probably felt putting even Batman and Superman together was one big movie when they could have had two big movies. But Marvel made them realize that, if they did a Batman/ Superman movie, they might have the biggest moneymaker ever.

Solo movies are capable of doing things a shared universe has to consider how it affects all the characters. But a shared universe can also be a grand, dramatic thing.

[CosmiComic]

perhaps, but I get the impression it's mostly Ray Fischer's fault.

That's not really fair, though. I think if Ray had all the charisma in the world, there would not be a Cyborg movie. That's not WB's fault. No one with any sense believes Cyborg spinoff is a billion dollar franchise.

Castle would have made a better case if he had listed Wonder Woman and Aquaman as Snyder-uplifted characters.

Cyborg is a more well known character than Zatanna or Blue Beetle yet they're getting movies.

[green_garnish]

Cyborg is a more well known character than Zatanna or Blue Beetle yet they're getting movies.

Thanks to Snyder, the public has an unlovely picture of Cyborg, which diminishes his appeal in a solo effort. There are no such preconceptions for Zatanna or Blue Beetle. And they are making a point of keeping Snyder well away from them.

[CosmiComic]

Thanks to Snyder, the public has an unlovely picture of Cyborg, which diminishes his appeal in a solo effort. There are no such preconceptions for Zatanna or Blue Beetle. And they are making a point of keeping Snyder well away from them.

They're also making a Green lantern show and that movie didn't do well. I wouldn't totally give up hope for Cyborg just yet

[green_garnish]

They're also making a Green lantern show and that movie didn't do well. I wouldn't totally give up hope for Cyborg just yet

Oh he can definitely be rehabilitated. The point is that he needs to be.

[Username taken]

...how do you think Snyder uplifted Superman when the character had countless movies prior?

And if he uplifted Cyborg, where's his movie?

Exactly.

Snyder didn't do anything for Superman.

WB is making a new Superman movie and the Snyder version of the character is apparently being abandoned.

If WB make a Cyborg movie, its not likely going to be the Snyderverse version.

[leapyear baby]

perhaps, but I get the impression it's mostly Ray Fischer's fault.

That's not really fair, though. I think if Ray had all the charisma in the world, there would not be a Cyborg movie. That's not WB's fault. No one with any sense believes Cyborg spinoff is a billion dollar franchise.

I agree. Cyborgs just not a big enough char for people to want this, even if people didn't already wanna touch Ray Fischer with a 100 yard pole.

[CosmiComic]

Oh he can definitely be rehabilitated. The point is that he needs to be.

Ok, well, I hope that happens someday.

[Castle]

perhaps, but I get the impression it's mostly Ray Fischer's fault.

That's not really fair, though. I think if Ray had all the charisma in the world, there would not be a Cyborg movie. That's not WB's fault. No one with any sense believes Cyborg spinoff is a billion dollar franchise.

Castle would have made a better case if he had listed Wonder Woman and Aquaman as Snyder-uplifted characters.

No it was not Wonder Woman or Aquaman, although Snyder did a good job in showing why they are important aspect of the League, especially Diana because she was the glue holding everyone together.

However Snyder gave Superman and Cyborg depth. He gave them real challenges and obstacles to overcome.

[Castle]

I would say Marvel's advantages were:

1. As you said, far lesser known characters to the general public. No absolute, pre-conceived notions about who they were or what they would do. So, Iron-Man can get away with killing people. Imagine if Superman was never Clark Kent the way Thor was never Don Blake in the movies? It could not be done.

Agreed

2. Marvel did it first so they had time to think it out while DC felt rushed and pressured.

Agreed 2

3. Marvel characters were mostly designed from the beginning of Marvel Comics to be in a shared universe. Artistically, the DC characters were not originally conceived of as existing in a shared universe and I think work better in their own styles.

Both Marvel and DC have the same equal vision of a shared universe, however many of their characters or IPs just grow a life of its own and become their own sort of entity. Marvel in particular really has 3 universes when you break their world down. Spiderman, X-MEN and Marvel

4. Good point that one reason DC never tried it before was because they had two big name characters (three if they had seen the potential of Wonder Woman) and probably felt putting even Batman and Superman together was one big movie when they could have had two big movies. But Marvel made them realize that, if they did a Batman/ Superman movie, they might have the biggest moneymaker ever.

Additionally DC were very director based. Tim Burton was not trying to Christopher Reeves and Chris Nolan was not trying to Tim Burton. The shared universe concept of marvel barely has any director based factor. Feige and Disney hires window dressed directors to do what they want. this is why Snyder has said, he can never direct any Marvel Universe film and they would not have been successful because he would have to change so much and have all the control
https://screenrant.com/marvel-cinema...r-bad-comment/

This is not a Snyder thing only, because many other directors like Bryan Singer and James Mangold said roughly the same thing .

At the end of the day, sure this stuff is comics, but still... many of this directors still want things to be taken seriously with high credibility film making to the movies as they would if they were doing a biopic about some historic figure.