5 Reasons I'm Skeptical Of The DC Cinematic Universe

With Batman V Superman edging closer, I'm listing the reasons I'm not sold on DC's push to make a 'cinematic universe'.

Editorial Opinion
By SpoonySpoon - Aug 05, 2014 01:08 PM EST
Filed Under: DC Comics

5 Reasons Things Look Bad For The DC Cinematic Universe.

1) Warner Brothers Is Only Interested In Franchises, Not Movies.

 

A big emphasis for movie studios is the classic ‘tentpole franchise’, this is loosely defined as a series of movies that the studio can spend a lot of money on, and will reliably make them a lot of money, the summer blockbuster. In recent years, Warner Brothers has been hurting for precious ‘tentpoles’. The one-two combination of “The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy” and the “Harry Potter” series steamrolled the box office, but as the source material ran out, so did the movies. Thus the decision to make The Hobbit (the shortest of the LOTR books) into THREE movies to really stretch out that sweet sweet LOTR money, and the decision to take a book referenced in one of the Harry Potter movies “Magical Beasts And Where To Find Them” and decide that needs to be a trilogy of movies. It’s no surprise that Warner Brothers recently talked to Guy Ritchie about getting him to make a 9-movie series about King Arthur.

 

The inherent problem with announcing 8 sequels before pen is put to paper on the first one, is that the quality of the first movie generally suffers. In move history, titles that are made solely for the purpose of kick-starting a trilogy generally flop critically and commercially, such as: Green Lantern, Prince Of Persia, John Carter, Battleship, Jack The Giant Slayer, The Lone Ranger. It should go without saying that studios should go into production thinking “let’s make the best movie possible and see how it goes” rather than thinking “we’re already planning the fourth one”. Pirates Of The Caribbean was conceived as one movie and it shows, there was no long origins, it was well received and closed in a neat little package. The majority of the listed movies are simply origin stories, where you have to watch the lead character be normal for maybe an hour before seeing them become the character on the poster in only the final 20 mins, and is usually very heavy on setting up the sequel.

 

Superman Returns is an early example of WB only looking at the bottom line as far as box office goes. The publicly loathed movie went down great with critics, but only pulled in $400 million at the box office, and considering $400 million is pretty much exactly what Warner Brothers spent trying to get the world to care about Superman, it’s technically a loss. Hopes for a sequel were dashed when WB executives said “Superman is the most recognisable superhero in the world! The movie deserved to make twice that! No way are we funding a sequel!” Despite the fact that nobody had cared about Superman since 1981, and it’s a goddam miracle a movie where Superman doesn’t punch anything got as far as $400 million. Hindsight may be 20/20, but at this point I’ll point out that 2005’s Batman Begins only netted WB somewhere around $350 million, but the sequel The Dark Knight broke a billion dollars. So, you know, there’s something to be said for taking risks.

 

2) WB Loves To Make Announcements Regardless Of The Impossible

 

I’d have to estimate that WB has been talking about making DC movies more than it’s actually made them. Seriously, for a number of years they’d make announcements about how they were thinking of making a Flash movie, and a Wonder Woman movie, writers and directors would occasionally come and go, but nothing ever happened with them. Warner Brothers bought DC in 1969, but hasn’t really figured out what to do with them since. With the exception of Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, WB has been pretty happy to let their all-star cast of recognisable superheroes fester on the shelf. The amount of movies based on DC properties but never came to fruition largely resembles a child’s art-book filled with drawings he barely started. There are at least three Superman movies that got as far as scripts and directors but never actually produced, a couple for Batman, one Justice League movie that actually cast all of it’s members and fitted them for costumes before getting hit by the writers strike and pulling the plug on the movie. Apparently a strike that lasted about 4 months was enough to kill the movie permanently.

 

However, The Avengers making a shit-ton of money made WB rethink it’s commitment to the bulging roster of superheroes that it’s sat on for 40 [frick]ing years, because a shortly after, WB came out with the proud announcement of “We’re gonna bring out a Justice League Movie In 2015 And It’s Gonna Be Amazing! Just You Wait And See!” The problem was that they didn’t have a script, a writer, a director or even a cast, just a dream to make billions of dollars like Marvel did. They kept blowing that trumpet before finally accepting it wasn’t going to happen. So instead the following year at Comic Con (2013) they proudly announced “We’re gonna do a Batman Vs Superman movie in 2015 And It’s Gonna Be Amazing!” Even though they had an even smaller production window, not really much more of a script, and the only confirmed cast member was Henry Cavill as Superman. Needless to say, WB eventually announced that they couldn’t make the movie for 2015, so decided to move the release date to 2016, on the exact same date Marvel had earmarked for Captain America 3.

 

3) Man Of Steel Was Only Made To Keep The Character Rights

 

Man Of Steel is the movie supposed to kick-start the DC Universe, which is a shame, because if it’s angst-ridden brooding is setting the tone for the future, we’re not in for a fun ride. But it’s important to remember that WB didn’t really want to make Man Of Steel in the first place. Yep, you read that right. While Batman was pulling in the moolah, WB wasn’t really that bothered about trying to drag Superman’s name out of the mud, having sunk a lot of money into it only a few years ago. Conversations were had after The Dark Knight hit big, but ultimately nothing came of it until they were told that if production wasn’t started on a Superman movie by 2011, they would be liable for a lawsuit by Jerry Seigel’s estate who owns 50% of Superman.

 

Little thing about character rights, they’re sort of on a “use them or lose them” basis for studios that share them with someone else, it’s the reason Constantin films made a Fantastic Four movie in 1994, but never intended to release it (or even tell the actors), but in doing so would get to keep the rights on technicality of having used the characters. It’s also the reason that the cinematic rights to Daredevil reverted back to Marvel from Fox because Fox had done nothing with the character in years. WB had made an agreement with Jerry Seigel to pay him off several thousand dollars a year for creating the character, but he was never happy with co-creating Superman then getting screwed out of profits by WB, so through a series of lawsuits was able to recapture 50% of the rights. Because of this, his estate would be liable to sue for loss of earnings if WB sat on the rights to a Superman movie but never actually made one, and if successful, could have taken the rights from WB.  With Superman Returns being an attempt to revive ‘classic Superman’ for modern audiences failing, and Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight being praised for “being a great crime thriller that happens to have Batman in it”, it feels like Man Of Steel was an attempt to make a Superman movie without Superman in it. Let’s not have Clark Kent as a bespectacled reporter, let’s make him a bearded hobo working manual labour. Let’s have Lois Lane figure out he’s Superman the first time they meet. Let’s take away the S-curl, the red underwear, the S on the back of his cape, let’s have nobody use the word Superman. It doesn’t fill me with confidence that the supposed stepping stone to a Justice League movie is based on a movie that’s almost ashamed to have Superman as a lead character.

 

4) They Still Won’t Take Risks

 

So Man Of Steel got fairly decent reviews, and though it didn’t make the squillions they hoped for, turned a profit with the aid of a $160 million product placement deal. What’s WB’s next move? A sequel? A Flash movie? That Justice League movie they’ve been crowing about for [frick]ing years?

 

Nope, it’s a sequel, with added Batman. 

 

See, there’s some debate online as to how much money Man Of Steel actually made. It’s conventional movie-making wisdom that every dollar you spend making a movie is two dollars you want to see at the box office, and with a bloated budget of nearly $250 million, and a marketing campaign of $150-$200 million, that’s around $450 million or more, meaning WB wanted to see at least $800-900 million in returns. However the aforementioned product placement deal technically offset their marketing budget, making their $660 million box office take into more of a profit than it actually would have been.

 

So what to do when your first step to a bold *new* world hasn’t quite made the splash you hoped it would? Of course, you add Batman, the only DC character who has ever grossed a billion dollars in a single movie. In the buildup to Justice League, Batman is the character who needs no introduction, audiences know who he is and his origins story, he could be dropped into a Justice League movie and nobody would be confused. Compared to the likes of Wonder Woman, The Flash and Shazam, whose backstories are lesser known, it’s hard dislike the fact that Batman is getting yet another movie yet so many characters will be unceremoniously dropped into the long fabled Justice League movie. And you can notice that WB hasn’t really announced anything beyond Batman Vs Superman, they still haven’t really committed to a Justice League movie, or any other solo flicks between BVS and JL. The string of failures like Catwoman, Superman Returns and Green Lantern could possibly be a reason why WB is making a big deal about having a DC Universe… but only one movie at a time.

 

So why doesn’t DC just come straight out with a Justice League movie? If The Avengers can be made for around $200 million, Justice League can easily be made for the $225-250 million WB spent on Man Of Steel. Well, a lot of people will say it’s because it can’t be done, that introducing 5 or so new characters in a movie, plus a villain, plus telling a story would be a suicide move. Well guess what, Marvel is now dominating with an almost $100 million opening weekend for Guardians Of The Galaxy, beating established brands such as Amazing Spider-Man 2, X-Men Days of Future Past and The Hobbit. This is a movie based on a comic-book the average public had never heard of, introducing a team of 5 heroes, one of which is a walking tree, the other a [frick]ing talking raccoon. If Marvel can turn a completely obscure comic with a wacky premise into a success, why can’t WB take a team of heroes, half of which people have actually heard of, and make a good movie? Whatever their reputation, at least people have actually heard of Superman, Batman and Wonder-Woman, yet apparently it’s simply impossible to make a straight-up movie about them? It means that we’ll never see a Justice League movie until WB decides a solo movie is successful enough.

 

5) Batman V Superman Is Shaping Up To Be Like Iron Man 2 and Amazing Spider-Man 2.

 

Okay, so Hollywood mandate dictates that sequels are supposed to be bigger, longer, and not quite as good as the original, that’s no surprise. What is surprising is the trend that’s oddly specific to the second movie of brand new franchises. Look at this way: Iron Man 1 made a lot of money and got great reviews and word of mouth, it gathered a lot of buzz for the laid-out plan to get to The Avengers. The whole ‘shared universe’ craze was birthed when Iron Man did well. So what did Marvel do for the sequel? Cram as much extra stuff in as they physically could. Nick Fury was given a large role, Black Widow an even larger one, lots of Avengers foreshadowing, Captain America’s shield, Thor’s hammer, War Machine, Iron Man 2 was criticised for being an advert for The Avengers. Do you think other studios would have learned from this? Of course not.

 

When Sony rebooted The Amazing Spider-Man, the world let out a unanimous “Ehhh…. really?” but when the movie got fairly positive reviews and $800 million in the bank, Sony jumped on the bandwagon of “We’re doing shared universes too!” because The Avengers. The problem is that Sony really only have the rights to Spider-Man, meaning it’s less of a “shared universe” as it is a “Spider-Man Universe”, as the supposed spinoff movies are of villains, such as Venom and The Sinister Six. How are Sony going to make kid movies about the bad guys? Are the bad guys going to try to kill Spider-Man? How would that work? In any case, now that Sony decided to do a cinematic universe, it’s time to cram the sequel with as much as they can. So they threw in three villains (Electro, Green Goblin, Rhino), they threw in clues to other villains (Dock Ock, Vulture, Morbius, Smythe, Venom, these are just the ones I know about), they threw in a potential Black Cat, they even threw in Mary Jane Watson, before removing all her scenes because they decided the movie was just too full to take another love interest. The movie had pretty much the same criticisms as Iron Man 2, and Sony pretty much admitted they just shot as much footage as they could and see what fits.

 

So, WB had moderate success with Man Of Steel, and they’ve decided to make it a cinematic universe so.. can you tell what happens next? Not content with a Superman sequel, they’ve thrown in Batman, which doesn’t sound so bad, except they’ve explicitly called it Batman V Superman, and eased us the fight from The Dark Knight Returns. So WB are trying to be like Marvel and have a long term plan, yet they’re giving us a big payoff the first time the two characters meet rather than building towards it? It feels a bit short sighted, kinda like having Captain America wield Thor’s hammer in the first Avengers movie. So there’s that, which would be fine if they weren’t also shoehorning Lex Luthor, Wonder Woman and Aquaman (that we know of) into the movie also.

 

 

So, this is my case against the proposed DC Cinematic Universe. These are merely my opinions.

ABSOLUTE BATMAN #1 Preview Shows The Dark Knight Using His Bat Chest Symbol As An Axe With Bloody Resuls
Related:

ABSOLUTE BATMAN #1 Preview Shows The Dark Knight Using His Bat Chest Symbol As An Axe With Bloody Resuls

BLACK CANARY: BEST OF THE BEST Writer Tom King Talks WWE Inspiration And Why It'll Make You F***ing Cheer
Recommended For You:

BLACK CANARY: BEST OF THE BEST Writer Tom King Talks WWE Inspiration And Why It'll Make You "F***ing Cheer"

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
Pasto
Pasto - 8/5/2014, 1:30 PM
*Dial-Tone*
Klone
Klone - 8/5/2014, 1:33 PM
Using logic and valid reasons to back up your concerns? CAREFUL MY FRIEND! The insane retard savages are on their way, ready to tear the flesh from your bones and boil you into a broth!
Klone
Klone - 8/5/2014, 1:35 PM
IM2 and TASM2 were similar in many aspects and acting like there aren't some signs for S/B that suggest it too may end up in a similar way near enough folly.
LEOSTRATOR
LEOSTRATOR - 8/5/2014, 1:55 PM
Ok?
tonytony
tonytony - 8/5/2014, 1:59 PM
another marvel fanboy scared to death of dc.
LEOSTRATOR
LEOSTRATOR - 8/5/2014, 1:59 PM
Hopefully the movie turn out good. I'm not a superman fan, but MoS was a ok movie, not as bad as some people say. AMSM and AMSM2 were shit.
yossarian
yossarian - 8/5/2014, 2:04 PM
I'm sure it'll be fine.
kinghulk
kinghulk - 8/5/2014, 2:11 PM
well written article, i share some of your concerns mainly because MOS i felt wasent as good as it could have been. but im gonna hold my judgement on the DCCU until i see BvS.
EhMaybeSays
EhMaybeSays - 8/5/2014, 2:19 PM
WB aren't making non-Supes/Bats movies because they WILL flop.
RamonSuarez
RamonSuarez - 8/5/2014, 2:28 PM
WB has a plan. Here it is:

1. Put Batman in every DC film.
2. Hope people will watch.
3. Maybe spinoff a film if a character catches on.
4. Repeat.
GreenLantern519
GreenLantern519 - 8/5/2014, 2:28 PM
I thought Man of Steel was good. I have confidence in this new film though, mainly because they have Terrio on board.
GreenLantern519
GreenLantern519 - 8/5/2014, 2:29 PM
We have no indication that WB doesn't have a plan. For all we know, they're writing 7 scripts that they're just waiting to pull the trigger on after BvS comes out.
Peel
Peel - 8/5/2014, 2:52 PM
It's been ages since I've seen a highly detailed article that voices all logical concerns for BvS, nicely done mate, thumbs up from me; I'll be coming back to read this article over and over.

I think though to an extent, WB are taking risks in terms of bringing Wonder Woman to the big screen finally, and also with their castings. They have had to know with at least Ben Affleck that the castings wouldn't be received overly well by everyone, but they've stuck with their guns and have put faith in Snyder, so I suppose that's one risk they're taking. One risk though, not that many.
kong
kong - 8/5/2014, 3:54 PM
Nice article, don't really agree. Better than half these marvelites on this site that annoy the SHIZNIT out of me.
MrBlackJack
MrBlackJack - 8/5/2014, 5:06 PM
Eh, I'd rebuttal, but I've been doing that for long time now. I'll just take a step back.
Reasonnnn
Reasonnnn - 8/5/2014, 5:12 PM
Great detailed article. Every person who posts "oh look another marvel fanboy afraid of DC" is just ignorant to take criticism for DC's universe or lack thereof.
JillyMcBeam
JillyMcBeam - 8/5/2014, 5:20 PM
I just can't see WB not investing time and money into the DCUniverse now. To do so would just be corporate suicide.
Moohika
Moohika - 8/5/2014, 6:41 PM
Haters will eat their words in 2016
MightyZeus
MightyZeus - 8/5/2014, 7:49 PM
I'm sure the universe will turn out okay. Good article though.

I know it's risky but at least WB's DC is finally taking a chance.
Scarilian
Scarilian - 8/5/2014, 9:14 PM
@Moohika
You mean in 2016 when Marvel will be the highest grossing franchise riding off the fame and success of Avengers 2 and releasing a popular sequel to one of their highest grossing second instalments in their series...

I don't support either side but lets be honest here chances are the same release date will badly affect both films and end up delaying the release of Justice League again.

Whatever the scenario, DC will end up in a worse position as they really need Batman V Superman to earn over a billion and if its fighting against tough competition chances are it wont. If BvS fails to make $1bn then we could see Justice League being pushed back or straight-up cancelled and replaced with a DC trinity film instead.

----

DC work best with animated films and films they don't rush, at this stage I'm honestly not interested in seeing Batman fighting Superman - as that goes against what the characters are supposed to represent.

I know they have fought in the past, but unless they have a really good script then I don't see the appeal in seeing a fight that logically Superman should win given the statement about Kryptonite not being included in the DCU...
feedonatreefrog
feedonatreefrog - 8/5/2014, 9:51 PM
We're still all going to watch BvS.

Justice League will be made.

They can be good movies. It just depends if Terrio/Snyder do a good job.
GoldSlayer1
GoldSlayer1 - 8/5/2014, 10:30 PM
I see what you're saying, but I still think its a misconception that this is a Man of Steel sequel.

I consider BvS to be the first "Batman/Superman: Somewhat of a JL Prequel" rather than MOS 2. But still a "sequel" in terms of shared universe time line.

But since you also mention that WB goes for tentpole franchises, I ask you this.

Based on the quality of the Sequels to Lord of The Rings and Harry Potter (and its other franchises), Do you think DC doesn't know what its doing or capable of doing?
feedonatreefrog
feedonatreefrog - 8/5/2014, 10:59 PM
This Batman/Superman movie is the sequel to MOS.

The Justice League movie will be the sequel to BvS.
GoldSlayer1
GoldSlayer1 - 8/5/2014, 11:01 PM
If you ask me, I think DC has a good chance of succeeding.
Because while they are doing a shared universe, all the current confirmations is that the shared universe is only between JL members.
Basically, they set limitations upon themselves.

Marvel on the other hand has a shared universe, that is now their standard.
Any new character that they want to introduce is now forced to be a part of this shared universe and they are hampered by the fact that they have to make the character fit the universe.

DC on the other hand, can have a JL movie and then still do other super hero movies (or shows) about other heroes, without having to figure out a viable story option that fits the universe.

The fact that they also have the rights to all of their characters is another major plus. While they may not use any of the lesser known heroes, they can still use any villains they want.

Villains like Ra's Al Gul, Mongul, Doomsday, Brainiac, Darkseid, Joker, Ares, Circe, Sinestro, Atrocitus, Parallax, Vandal Savage, Anti-monitor, Man hunters, Trigon, Deathstroke, Luthor, Amazo (JLU Version), Injustice League, Legion of Doom, Crime Syndicate, Zoom, Grodd, Black Manta, Ocean Master, Black Adam, Lobo, White martians, etc.

Also IMO, The biggest reason why Avengers was so successful is the novelty factor and repeat viewings (there are PLENTY of people who've said they watched it multiple times in theater).

In terms of movie, I personally think it was an action movie with some comedy involving super heroes (A genre currently growing in popularity). Story wise IMO, it wasn't anywhere near the best.
GoldSlayer1
GoldSlayer1 - 8/5/2014, 11:09 PM
@Feedonatreefrog
I dont think you understand what I was getting at.
Its a Batman/Superman movie, not Man of Steel 2. (the title alone should be proof of this. also the fact that it teases JUSTICE League in the title, as if to say its a JL prequel)

That's where IMO the OP lost his argument comparing it to Spiderman 2 or Iron Man 2, which are direct sequels to Spiderman 1 and Iron Man 1.

So it a sequel? In terms of Universe, yes it is. Just like The Incredible Hulk was a Sequel to Iron Man.

There was also a highly rumored report (by someone named Finkle something or something Finkle) of a list of future DC movies that are planned, and Man of Steel 2 was listed.
feedonatreefrog
feedonatreefrog - 8/5/2014, 11:20 PM
@GoldSlayer1
Actually I do understand what you're getting at because I said the same thing ;)
tonytony
tonytony - 8/5/2014, 11:23 PM
the idea wb dont know what they are doing or is rushing is false and perpetuated by marvel fan boys.

most of their superhero movies have been good. look at v for vendetta, watchmen,the first 300 or a history of violence. also look at tdk trilogy and mos literally great movie after great movie the only turkey in recent times was green lantern but by and large they make great movies. Marvel has action comedy after action comedy and the forced humour is becoming formulaic and predictable.
GoldSlayer1
GoldSlayer1 - 8/5/2014, 11:54 PM
@RebelVulcan
Regarding that, (of characters being like batman)
Its a big reason why I believe DC should go with Wally West Flash and John Stewart Green Lantern from the JLU show.

- Barry Allen Already has his own show, and I think its stupid to have 2 active interpretations of the same character.

- A JLU inspired Wally West could provide Comedic relief in a Dark/Serious toned universe.

- John Stewart is the more recognizable character, and Green Lantern (2011) flopped.


While I dont want to get into an argument regarding superman being a brooding charater like batman, I personally dont believe the cheesy superman from the 80s would work in current times.
The ridicule that came from Superman Returns should be somewhat proof of that.

Maybe its the superman we need, and not the one we deserve.
SageMode
SageMode - 8/6/2014, 3:50 AM
Of course WB/DC has a plan: to be reactionary to Marvel is doing and proceed to do something comparable hoping that it'll be as successful as Marvel's project. It just seems like WB/DC is more concerned with the spectacle of a shared cinematic universe, and not the structure of it. And even if BvS turns out to be a garbage movie (which it more than likely will because of the castings and director involved) you'll still have those that will rabidly claim this movie as the greatest thing since fire for the SOLE reason that Batman and Superman are in the same movie together.
tonytony
tonytony - 8/6/2014, 4:20 AM
sagemode you just described marvel fanboys and guardians of the galaxy
matthuliz
matthuliz - 8/6/2014, 9:33 AM
I'm skeptical about this article being skeptical.

:-P

FOX started the cinematic universe, Marvel followed, so why not WB/DC do the same???

There you go! It's not Marvel! It's FOX who started it all, whether we like it or not, it's the truth! So those who keep saying that Marvel is a game changer for their MCU, go keep fooling yourselves.

1 2
View Recorder