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

[Powerboy]

Agreed




Agreed 2



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



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.

According to Tom Mankiewicz, there was an element of luck involved. He was the guy who, apparently, did the final rewrites for "Superman" (1978) to make something cohesive out of the jumble. He recalled being talked to when they were planning to do "Batman" (1989) and the DC/ WB consensus at the time was to do it as lighthearted and comedic because that had worked for the Superman movies and for the 1960s Batman show. He felt that what worked for Superman did not work for Batman and they should go as dark as they possibly could. Luckily, they chose Tim Burton who convinced them his way would work. I do believe- and this is not an artistic criticism but one based on mass appeal- that they made the same mistake with MoS because of the popularity of the DK movies. They thought it would work for Superman.

We do have quotes from directors saying they had a lot of creative freedom in the MCU. Of course, at the end of the day, MCU or DCEU, the company has the final say. The MCU does not vary as much as the DCEU, however.

While I would not exactly say Spider-Man is his own universe, the MCU proved the sorry mess that results when you try to fit someone else like Iron-Man in as a major player in Spider-Man's story in the early stages. Not sure how Spider-Man is his own setting though anymore than, say, Kazar or a number of characters.

The X-Men really do work better in their own universe. Why is everyone bent out of shape about mutants when the Norse gods come a calling and there's super beings everywhere as threats? Why wasn't it always just fear of super beings?

[WebLurker]

The X-Men really do work better in their own universe. Why is everyone bent out of shape about mutants when the Norse gods come a calling and there's super beings everywhere as threats? Why wasn't it always just fear of super beings?

The arguments I've seen come down to "the illogic of racism" and "mutants are going to 'replace' humanity." I do agree that they work better as their own thing overall. While there could be some interesting story fodder about the double standard with mutants, the comics rarely explore it.

[Holt]

It was not necessary for DC to do a shared universe.

And yet they did. This is the Oscar thing all over again. It's totally fine if you prefer DC to Marvel, but you insist on making arguments that rely on things that can be refuted with a simple google search. You can brag all you want about how DC's characters don't need a shared universe because they're supposedly bigger or more artistically pure than Marvel's, but the fact of the matter is WB has been pushing a shared universe since 2013 and look to be still doing so for the foreseeable future.

[Metro]

According to Tom Mankiewicz, there was an element of luck involved. He was the guy who, apparently, did the final rewrites for "Superman" (1978) to make something cohesive out of the jumble. He recalled being talked to when they were planning to do "Batman" (1989) and the DC/ WB consensus at the time was to do it as lighthearted and comedic because that had worked for the Superman movies and for the 1960s Batman show. He felt that what worked for Superman did not work for Batman and they should go as dark as they possibly could. Luckily, they chose Tim Burton who convinced them his way would work. I do believe- and this is not an artistic criticism but one based on mass appeal- that they made the same mistake with MoS because of the popularity of the DK movies. They thought it would work for Superman.

We do have quotes from directors saying they had a lot of creative freedom in the MCU. Of course, at the end of the day, MCU or DCEU, the company has the final say. The MCU does not vary as much as the DCEU, however.

While I would not exactly say Spider-Man is his own universe, the MCU proved the sorry mess that results when you try to fit someone else like Iron-Man in as a major player in Spider-Man's story in the early stages. Not sure how Spider-Man is his own setting though anymore than, say, Kazar or a number of characters.

The X-Men really do work better in their own universe. Why is everyone bent out of shape about mutants when the Norse gods come a calling and there's super beings everywhere as threats? Why wasn't it always just fear of super beings?

There's been no mess with Spider-Man so I have no clue what you're talking about.
And the idea the DCEU is more varied is pretty funny, it's inconsistent if anything not more varied.

[Powerboy]

There's been no mess with Spider-Man so I have no clue what you're talking about.
And the idea the DCEU is more varied is pretty funny, it's inconsistent if anything not more varied.

The Spider-Man reference is to his being more Iron-boy or Iron-Spider than Spider-Man, being subsumed into revolving around Tony Stark.

I like the MCU very much but most of the movies started quickly falling into the "Must not go even one minute without a quip or undercutting everything for a joke" formula, Sure, there are rare exceptions but that's the general pattern. That is not to say there are not a variety of styles (Castle's arguments are not my arguments). But there are certain formulaic things they seem to want in almost every movie now. I think it's mostly because that style works for RDJ and it was the first movie so, if it works...

DC is more varied unless someone is really arguing that, say, B v S, WW and Shazam all have the same core tone.

On the other hand, the DCEU have learned from the MCU. Wonder Woman, who they spent decades having no faith in, was one of their biggest movies. Who would have believed Aquaman would be a billion dollar hit?

For a bit, it seemed everything was going to copy the MCU including the constant quips. But, I think the success of "Joker" (outside of the DCEU, granted) and the very positive reaction to the Snyder Cut has, I hope, made them realize they might want to stick to their original vision.

As I said, I like the MCU. But I don't want every superhero movie to decide it has to do it that way.

[CosmiComic]

How positive was the reaction to the Snyder Cut though?

[Metro]

The Spider-Man reference is to his being more Iron-boy or Iron-Spider than Spider-Man, being subsumed into revolving around Tony Stark.

So things that are nonexistent then, because none of that is true.

I like the MCU very much but most of the movies started quickly falling into the "Must not go even one minute without a quip or undercutting everything for a joke" formula, Sure, there are rare exceptions but that's the general pattern. That is not to say there are not a variety of styles (Castle's arguments are not my arguments). But there are certain formulaic things they seem to want in almost every movie now. I think it's mostly because that style works for RDJ and it was the first movie so, if it works...

DC is more varied unless someone is really arguing that, say, B v S, WW and Shazam all have the same core tone.

And this is just where I stop, the second people start on this "All MCU movies are the same because they have levity" is the same second I no longer care.
Especially when you're gonna tell me DC is more varied like MoS, BvS, and JL aren't all basically the same movie, and WW somehow goes from a War movie to the sequel being an cheesy 80's action comedy, that's not variety that's inconsistency.

[CosmiComic]

So things that are nonexistent then, because none of that is true.

And this is just where I stop, the second people start on this "All MCU movies are the same because they have levity" is the same second I no longer care.
Especially when you're gonna tell me DC is more varied like MoS, BvS, and JL aren't all basically the same movie, and WW somehow goes from a War movie to the sequel being an cheesy 80's action comedy, that's not variety that's inconsistency.

I think the "all MCU are the same" is a bit overstated tbh. Although I don't think WW2 being so different from WW1 is a bad thing either

[Powerboy]

So things that are nonexistent then, because none of that is true.

And this is just where I stop, the second people start on this "All MCU movies are the same because they have levity" is the same second I no longer care.
Especially when you're gonna tell me DC is more varied like MoS, BvS, and JL aren't all basically the same movie, and WW somehow goes from a War movie to the sequel being an cheesy 80's action comedy, that's not variety that's inconsistency.

Yup. So Spider-Man wasn't wearing a suit totally designed by Tony Stark and wasn't answering to Tony Stark. Never happened. Got it.

So, your very argument says DC is more varied. The Snyder movies were the same, sure. The Patty Jenkins movies are not the same as the Snyder movies and you just said yourself that WW and WW '84 are not the same movie.

The MCU had fallen too much into relying on the levity to carry the popularity of the movies whether than levity fits or whether it doesn't. If it's a good movie anyway, it doesn't matter. If it's a weak movie, they know the lightheartedness will carry it.

[Powerboy]

I think the "all MCU are the same" is a bit overstated tbh. Although I don't think WW2 being so different from WW1 is a bad thing either

Actually, I didn't say they were all the same. I said they rely too much on the one-liners whether they fit the situation or not. I don't even think that's a bad thing other than that audiences have kind of taken to the idea that every superhero movie should now be that way. That's not even to say there cannot be comedy relief. But the MCU relies on it too much.

[CosmiComic]

Actually, I didn't say they were all the same. I said they rely too much on the one-liners whether they fit the situation or not. I don't even think that's a bad thing other than that audiences have kind of taken to the idea that every superhero movie should now be that way. That's not even to say there cannot be comedy relief. But the MCU relies on it too much.

Some of the MCU movies do. However, while I think they should tone it down sometimes, I think it makes the characters more lively, if that's the right word.

And since when did audiences say every superhero movie hed to be like that?

And what's wrong with Tony designing the Iron Spider?

[chicago_bastard]

Actually, I didn't say they were all the same. I said they rely too much on the one-liners whether they fit the situation or not. I don't even think that's a bad thing other than that audiences have kind of taken to the idea that every superhero movie should now be that way. That's not even to say there cannot be comedy relief. But the MCU relies on it too much.

I don't think audiences believe every comic book movie should be like that, it's more like that Snyder's movies were disliked because they were bad, not because they didn't have enough humor. If audiences wanted humor in every comic book movie then Joker wouldn't have become a hit.

[numberthirty]

I don't think audiences believe every comic book movie should be like that, it's more like that Snyder's movies were disliked because they were bad, not because they didn't have enough humor. If audiences wanted humor in every comic book movie then Joker wouldn't have become a hit.

While there is that point of view...

That film is really only a "Comic Book Movie..." if someone is seriously intent on trying to make it into one.

The Dolph Lundgren "Punisher..." film is more of a comic book movie than Joker was.

[Agent Z]

While there is that point of view...

That film is really only a "Comic Book Movie..." if someone is seriously intent on trying to make it into one.

The Dolph Lundgren "Punisher..." film is more of a comic book movie than Joker was.

Joker is a movie based on a comic book character. Not all comic books are the same and not all comic book movie are the same or should be.

[chicago_bastard]

While there is that point of view...

That film is really only a "Comic Book Movie..." if someone is seriously intent on trying to make it into one.

The Dolph Lundgren "Punisher..." film is more of a comic book movie than Joker was.

Well it was clearly the Joker character that drew audiences to the movie in the first place. If they had just Arthur Fleck be an average guy without the Joker connection the movie would never have come close to making a billion at the box office. I'm pretty sure the majority of the audience were expecting a movie based on a comic book character when they purchased their tickets.