Marvel Vs. DC

Marvel Vs. DC

A simple breakdown as to how Marvel is dominating at the box office and how DC appears to not even be trying to keep up...

Editorial Opinion
By superfan714 - Oct 09, 2010 07:10 PM EST
Filed Under: Other



As many of you know the comic book movie era revolution began primarily in 2000 with the release of X-Men. Since then there has been an unstoppable wave of films based on comic book literature rapidly increasing in size and speed. But the majority of these films? More often than not they are produced by Marvel. Why is this? I recall the very first silver screen adaptations being that of Superman in 1978 and followed a little over a decade later by Batman in 1989. Each of these spawned 3 sequels (if you don't count Superman Returns, which I certainly don't). It's fair to say that Superman 3 and 4 destroyed the series popularity and demand for anymore sequels, as for Batman, the transition of director and lead role actually didn't do bad for revenue. All in all I would still state that Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were horrible and it wasn't until 2005 that the character got the treatment necessary to survive in Batman Begins. It is still shocking to me to see that there are NO other major DC characters on film other than these two. What does that add up to? Well, do the math: 5 Superman films and 6 Batman films, making a total of 11. Again, 2 characters ELEVEN movies. (Of course I have excluded Watchmen, which I don't consider as popular as Superman or Batman)

Meanwhile Marvel has put out quite a list that is difficult for even Superman and Batman combined to tackle. As many of you may not know there was a live-action Punisher (with Dolph Lundgren as Frank Castle) from 1989. This is hardly mentionable, as it got mostly negative reviews. And there was even a 1994 incarnation of The Fantastic Four which was never released in theatres.
Even though 1998's Blade garnered 2 sequels and was somewhat crowd-pleasing, I will choose to begin with X-Men as I previously stated based on its critical reception and popularity. Since then an expansive list has been generated including spin-offs of certain films that may have not seen a sequel otherwise.
Starting with X-Men, they are:

X-Men (2000)
Spider-Man (2002)
Daredevil (2003)
X2 (X-Men 2) (2003)
Hulk (2003)
The Punisher (2004)
Spider-Man 2 (2004)
Elektra (Daredevil spin-off) (2005)
Fantastic 4 (2005)
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
Ghost Rider (2007)
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)
Iron Man (2008)
The Incredible Hulk (2008)
Punisher: War Zone (2008)
X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)
Iron Man 2 (2010)

Already that makes for 18 movies 7 of which include recurring characters either through sequels, reboots or spin-offs. I gotta say that's pretty impressive for a corporation that had no prior exposure decades ago like DC did. And furthermore there are already 3 more marvel comic characters coming to theatres next year. Two of these are brand new characters in terms of big-screen treatment (Thor and Captain America). The prequel film X-Men: First Class is set to be released June 3rd 2011. 2012 ushers in even MORE Marvel action as the Avengers brings together superhero mega-stars Thor, Captain America, The Hulk and Iron Man. Ghost Rider also gets a sequel in the same year and there is of course the Spider-Man reboot which I have commented on before in a previous article of mine. Undoubtedly there will be more produced along the lines of X-Men developments in terms of prequels and origin stories.

When you compare the two rival companies, the results are staggering. How did this come to be? Unquestionably the interest of comic-book turned movie medium was catapulted with the developments of the original Superman and Batman movies. With the augmentation of special effects wizardry over time it would seem that DC- having had its hand in the basket already-would simply pull out names and run with it. Sadly this has not happened. Batman was re-done. Superman was regrettable- brought back in a shameless apparition presented as a "semi"-sequel only to the first 2 of the Reeve series.

The only movie confirmed to be planned for a release next year is Green Lantern which is already creating a buzz and stirring skeptics with it's completely CG suit as opposed to the classic black, white and green uniform Hal Jordan dons in the comics. I believe that the thing that sells these stories is remaining faithful to the original literature. After all, the target audience is people that READ comic books, right?

As a kid I was always engrossed on DC. I absolutely loved Superman, The Flash and all of the Justice League. Where is the devotion and the drive to build up to a Justice League film in the same fashion that the folks over at Marvel are doing for The Avengers? Simply put, Marvel has been generating a substantial amount of films each year and undoubtedly turning much more of a profit than DC is at this point. DC is really losing this race by far. Where is Aquaman? Wonder Woman? The Flash or even Martian Manhunter? I have spent countless hours trying to dig up any info on even just a script in the works for any of these films and nothing looks promising. Most of it is just rumors if anything and it's quite irritating.

Exactly how long will it take for DC to get on the ball? Are they even SEEING how well Marvel is dominating at this point? Who IS better, DC or Marvel? Once again this is Superfan714 [aka real name Andrew (as revealed for the first time)] signing off...as always sound off below....
THE 4:30 MOVIE Interview: Filmmaker Kevin Smith On How His Passion For The Theater Shaped New Film (Exclusive)
Related:

THE 4:30 MOVIE Interview: Filmmaker Kevin Smith On How His Passion For The Theater Shaped New Film (Exclusive)

THE FRANCHISE: Trailer For Max Series Starring Daniel Brühl Reveals Chaos Inside World Of Superhero Filmmaking
Recommended For You:

THE FRANCHISE: Trailer For Max Series Starring Daniel Brühl Reveals Chaos Inside World Of Superhero Filmmaking

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.

superfan714
superfan714 - 10/9/2010, 8:29 PM
@ Coopkiller
I don't know if I can agree with you if you're suggesting there is no quality involved with the movies Marvel is putting out. I can honestly say that the X-Men films were quite good as are the two Iron-Man films so far. I can see why they rebooted both Hulk and Punisher respectively and I'm sure the Spider-Man trilogy was well-received although I understand the falling out between the studio and Sam Raimi led to a reboot as well. But to say that DC is not rushing their films in an understatement as they have had quite some time since the release of the '78 Superman to get a handle on other characters and their potential within the corporation and genre as a whole.
npatil
npatil - 10/9/2010, 9:35 PM
this is an old tired argument, i predict once green lantern destroys the competion followed by the knockout of nolans batman and snyders superman dc characters will easily take the lead.

these films will be fewer but when they come out they will be huge movie events!!!!!!

then flash will come out and ww and aquaman and lobo.


WB is the problem all these years. marvels properties are spread out thus more films.

right now dc dominates video games(quality), animated films (quality), television regardless if you live smallville or not it lasted 10 years, comics-blackest night did amazing.

dc learned from there mistakes but they arent saying much but nevertheless they are playing the wild card route just focusing on their plans and not talking everyone about their plans.

hopefully neil gaiman will bring sandman to the screen and wildstorm will be a part of the dc universe.
52 earths? maybe?
TayDee
TayDee - 10/9/2010, 11:15 PM
DC has had over 20 years of quality time to make their films...it took Marvel's comic book movies to show that they can make money in order for DC to catch up
jbak368
jbak368 - 10/10/2010, 12:02 AM
The target audience is not the comic book fans. They assume they'll come anyway out of curiosity and brand loyalty. The target audience is the people who don't read comics. If only the fans go to see it, the movie still bombs (Serenity, Watchmen, Superman Returns, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World). TDK and Iron Man made bank because EVERYONE went to see them.
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 10/10/2010, 4:23 AM
Exactly...

QUALITY over QUANTITY!!!

Um...

WATCHMAN... DARK KNIGHT... um SUPERMAN THE MOVIE!

The list goes on... DC has the best cbm's EVER made!


Okay.. we've got stuff like HEX an CATWOMAN (ShITe) but theres much more shiT at MARVEL!

BORIGINS, X3, WHOREZONE the list goes on...

Even IRON MAN 2 was below average!

Anyways I'm a MARVEL and DC fan... THOR and GREEN LANTERN are gonna set new standards for stuff like the SH1T FOX is pulling!

Another thing... You can hardly compare really???... MARVEL STUDIOS has had 3 movies out so far, WB/DC has tons more... you can't include FOX, SONY LIONSGATE etc etc etc! : p

Differant companies.

Btw way DC is way ahead on animated movies, live-action TV too, MARVEL's so behind its not even funny.


I'm not sure where your article is going lol?
Twenty23Three
Twenty23Three - 10/10/2010, 6:54 AM
the first two x-men, the directors cut of daredevil, the first iron man and the incredible hulk (and I will give you maybe the first two Spiderman films but I am not a fan of the character to begin with). So thats 5, maybe 7, films that weren't total garbage out of what almost 20? not exactly a good record.

Marvel are still not worth trusting and Iron Man 2 proved that even when they do it themselves they can mess up.
Roscoe182
Roscoe182 - 10/10/2010, 10:49 AM
Yup DC have made some good films but they dont need two or three films a year im happy for one film and 2-3 animated films and they all pretty much rock..

Marvel are going the other way i dont think its the wrong thing to do but but having Disney behind you and not makeing an animated film is just a huge loss to them marvel could make a cgi film and clean up but maby they want to plant them self on the Movie map before turning the attention to animated 1s.
TayDee
TayDee - 10/10/2010, 11:36 AM
all of those films you people are naming aren't even films made by Marvel....the only marvel movie worth criticizing is Iron Man 2
Twenty23Three
Twenty23Three - 10/10/2010, 12:39 PM
just because they weren't made by the Marvel Studios which is making the avengers and such doesn't mean there not Marvel films. Still says Marvel studios at the start of the films. Still Marvel characters.
superfan714
superfan714 - 10/10/2010, 1:02 PM
I'm not sure some of you realize what I'm talking about here. @Coopkiller: I'm not referencing Marvel STUDIOS I'm talking about the films made that are based directly on Marvel COMIC BOOKS(thank you Twenty23Three). I would imagine that was clear in itself...however I can see the misconception. As for the quality over quanity debate I am not including direct-to-video animated films or live action TV series, I am simply talking about live-action BIG SCREEN MOVIES. @ LEEE777: My article is simply reflective of the fact that DC comic book characters are scarce on the big screen compared to Marvel comic book characters. Back to quality vs. quanity: how does Superman Returns rate? How long was that movie passed between different directors and writers before being materialized? How long do you really need to toss an idea around before making it? And then when it finally gets made it is a sure disappointment...Sorry but I don't see the quality over quanity as a strong argument. The only decent films DC has made over the last decade was Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Thats TWO movies and needless to say but the same character. C'mon guys, you ned to bring more to the table if you want to keep that Q vs Q argument alive. The fact is it's not there....GL may prove DC still has what it takes to keep moving ahead with quality films but it's not out yet so we don't know...and jbak368, as for the target audience, I would honestly like to think that anyone in their right mind is first and foremost making these movies to appeal to all demographics but at the heart of things they are made to reel in the fans of the source material. To be blatantly honest you're not going to spend $100 million dollars on a film with absolute disregard to comic book fans(although this is arguable given the quality/quanity debate) so I'm pretty sure those fans are being kept in mind when making a film based on a comic book... What I really want to stir out of you guys is which DC (or Marvel) characters do you think would dominate at the box office if made into live-action films? What legitimate reason does DC have to be unwilling to take more chances on big-screen adaptations of it's characters and how big of a part does Warner Bros. play in all this? These are the real questions for debate...
OdinsBeard
OdinsBeard - 10/10/2010, 5:32 PM
wow.... im so sick of this argument even tho i seem to be the only one on the internet on my side(EDIT, going and back reading the comments i am not the only one). DC is doing the smartest thing possible. Marvel will crash and burn and DC will fly by laughing as it leaves Marvel in it's wake. it's the classic story of the tortoise and the hare. and impatient, anxious, needy fanboy community has backed the hare.

how long has WB been around making movies? a hell of a lot longer than Marvel has. and your argument "I'm not referencing Marvel STUDIOS I'm talking about the films made that are based directly on Marvel COMIC BOOKS" has no leg to stand on because Marvel doesn't see the money from those movies. Don't you read other websites bedies this one? WB is trying to replace their harry potter money- not with one franchise but with 5 or 6 running simultaneously. They know exactly what they are doing..

Besides, whether through revisionist history or not, The Avengers exist in much more of a unified universe than the JLA. The origin of each avenger can be tied back to effecting another character and their lives have always been intertwined. DC heroes just team up to "take on threats no one else can" because they look cool as a team. The Avengers HAVE to be a team. Captain America isn't as cool without Tony Stark. The existence of Nick Fury really ties them all together. The JLA do not need to be on a team. The characters are all cool and do fine on their own.

never be a business man.
TayDee
TayDee - 10/10/2010, 6:06 PM
bottom line is that all we need to do is enjoy the films instead of comparing the two companies anyways because that debate will never end
superfan714
superfan714 - 10/10/2010, 6:07 PM
@OdinsBeard If you can, take a second to read the article again. I am in no way proposing an argument especially on Marvel's behalf...I'm simply stating the facts, and the fact is there are more movies out with Marvel characters then there are with DC comics characters.

to everyone else:
I just want to hear more from fans on how this effects them. Personally, I'm taken aback by how many more movies Marvel has in the hole. Enough with the "patiently waiting" "tortoise and the hare" "quality over quanity" crap already! Superman Returns sucked! and how long did we all "wait" for that? Seriously, this is not an argument any more than it is an expression of disappointment...I am a DC fan, always have been...I just don't see how DC is suddenly going to come out with ONE good film a year and beat out Marvels growing popularity in FILMS at THIS point. Marvels plans extend well beyond 2017 with the characters it is developing for the big screen. I think anyone posting on this article needs to read carefully and direct their energies to WHAT THEY BELEIVE WILL HELP DC...that was the main reason I wrote it...TO HEAR ABOUT WHO YOUR FAVE DC CHARACTERS ARE and HOW THEY COULD BE POSITIONED IN A FILM THAT WOULD WORK GREAT FOR THEM...not this pointless squabble as to how DC is going to suddenly jump out and crush Marvel in a competition or how I'M an impatient fanboy who doesn't know what he's talking about...jeeez. Oh and I'm not talking about WB as a whole or the money that Marvel sees from movies made from their characters, I'm talking about all COMIC BOOK MOVIES and their popularity with fans regardless which studio produces them. It just so happens WB does DC movies that was why I mentioned them...I could care less about Harry Potter, The Matrix or whatever other films they've made...I'm talking about the comic book movies they made which are not many if you consider they've been based on the same two characters since '78.
superfan714
superfan714 - 10/10/2010, 6:08 PM
oy vey...does no one get what I'm talking about? Why did I even write this article??
superbatspiderman
superbatspiderman - 10/10/2010, 6:20 PM
I am more of a DC person than Marvel I enjoy the movies of DC more like how i am way more excited for green Lantern than Thor. But yeah DC and Marvel quality over quantity is the issue here Marvel should definatitly slow down.
SeaSerpentine
SeaSerpentine - 10/11/2010, 7:49 AM
Most of the DC movies we got in the 00's were adaptations of miniseries or graphic novels (mostly Alan Moore stuff)...and Scatwoman.
ROBBEATZZZ
ROBBEATZZZ - 10/11/2010, 7:57 AM
LOL!...YOU KNOW I JUST DONT THINK DC CHARACTERS APPEAL THE SAME WAY MARVELS DOES..MARVEL MAKES YOU BELEIVE THAT THESE CHARACTERS CAN EXIST IN OUR WORLD..BECAUSE THE STORIES ARE SET IN OUR WORLD WITH PLACES AND HISTORIC EVENTS..IF IT WEREN'T FOR DIFF STUDIO'S OWNING FILM RIGHT TO DIFF CHARACTERS WE WOULD SEE LOTS OF CROSSOVERS IN ONE MARVEL UNIVERSE..

DC ON THE OTHER HAND DOSENT SEEM LIKE THEIR CHARACTERS ARE CONNECTED THE SAME LIKE MARVELS .OK THEY HAVE JUSTICE LEAGUE BUT THEY ARE ALREADY HAVING ISSUES BRINGING THEIR CHARACTERS IN THE SAME FILM UNIVERSE (NOLANS BATMAN IN A DIFF UNIVERSE?)A JL WITHOUT SUPES AND BATMAN?...WOW!..THEY DONT HAVE FILM RIGHTS ISSUES LIKE MARVEL!!DO THEY?..GL MAY BE A GREAT FILM NEXT SUMMER IM INTRIGUED.. YEA MARVEL WENT ON OVERLOAD BUT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY CAN MAKE THEIR CHARACTERS WORK ON LIFE ACTION
ROBBEATZZZ
ROBBEATZZZ - 10/11/2010, 8:08 AM
@superfan714 NICE JOB!...DC IS SLOWER 4 A REASON..THEY DONT HAVE ENOUGH JUICE.. MARVELS CHARACTERS JUST APPEAL MORE..NOLANS BATMAN IS KOOL (BUT DOSENT EXIST IN SUPERMANS WORLD)..GL MIGHT BE A HIT..SUPERMAN WILL ALWAYS BE SUPERMAN..HIS STORY IS BORING..FLASH MIGHT BE OK..OTHER THAN THAT...I DONT KNOW HOW THEY WILL KEEP UP
superfan714
superfan714 - 10/11/2010, 12:18 PM
@ROBBEATZZZ thanks for the feedback, I gotta say I kinda agree with the Marvel charatcers having more appeal in this day and age, after all there are fewer fictional settings like Gotham and Metropolis...and the problem with crossovers arose when Chris Nolan took the reigns to the Batman franchise-I'm not saying this is a bad thing as I beleive Nolan did the best job so far with Batman-but keep in mind that if Justice League is to come to fruition there will have to be a crossover at some point...perhaps GL will set the stage for that...
golden123
golden123 - 10/11/2010, 1:24 PM
@superfan714: The comic bookfans aren't the target audience mainly because as of 2009 only 500,000 people in the USA actually read comics there for if all 500k people went to the movie the movie would kinda fail. Also the Superman Returns sucked argument is complete opinion I thought Superman Returns was a very good movie and I would appreciate your input on why it sucked ecause I'm cerious about what other people think.
superfan714
superfan714 - 10/11/2010, 3:28 PM
@ golden123 Here is my opinion on why Superman Returns sucked: First of all it wasn't anything more than a 2 1/2 hour love letter to Richard Donner. I feel that this wasn't neccessary. Who is Richard Donner to have the say all end all in the definitive version of Superman? Secondly, there wasn't enough action. Superman didn't lay a single fist into ANYTHING...this is hardly the grounds on which the Man of STEEL should operate. Furthermore, it was the same boring "land-stealing-scheme" Lex Luthor villian...wasn't this plot already adressed in the '78 movie?? If you calcuate Superman/Clark Kents screen time it didn't even come close to Lex Luthors--case and point--I seriously believe that many people went to see this film because of Kevin Spaceys portrayal...and on the simple basis that fans were just so eager to see a Superman movie in the first place...Also, the love triangle with Cyclops? And the bastard child Superman has with Lois??? C'mon! Brian Singer really lost sight of what makes a good Superman movie and simply put what makes a good Superman movie is in itself: simplicity...he should'nt be depicted as a complicated character, after all, he's not Batman...what should be complicated is everything else around Superman and his good will creates a beacon of hope...Delving deeper into the depiction of the character (Brandon Routh wasn't too shabby by the way) he was a stalker (floating outside Lois and Cyclops' house using x-ray vision and super hearing to SPY on them). He was also depicted (if you really think about it) as completely stupid---reason being: His own FATHER told him that Krypton exploded and that he was the last of their kind, yet without even checking with the scientists who discovered Krypton may still be there (as indicated by the fact that when he leaves noone knows where he went) he rushes off into outerspace without telling anyone, completely abandoning his duties and whats worse is that he does this presumably only a few months after (if you've seen Superman II) he's told the president that "he's sorry for being away so long" and that "it won't happen again." And this is based chronologically from the events that transpired between Superman II and Superman Returns. What I also find bothersome is the fact that Brian Singer felt the right to just "ignore" Superman III and IV---now I'm not going to go as far as saying that those two films deserved an award or something but they were part of the series continuity--and I beleived the 4th one had Christopher Reeve involved creatively--talk about a spit in the face! Lastly, even Jeff Robinov, president of Warner Bros. has stated that: “Superman didn’t quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to,” and “It didn’t position the character the way he needed to be positioned. ... Had Superman worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009.” I beleive I could continue, but that's all for now thank you....
AlReg
AlReg - 10/12/2010, 8:17 AM
It's not a competition because it's not like the mainstream public will only watch comic book movies from one company to them it's all the same it's only fans who obsess over this stuff.

I would love to see a Justice League movie but it's not going to happen and just because Avengers is being made (which feels like a marketing gimmick more then a movie) doesn't mean someone has to counteract it.
NightBat
NightBat - 10/12/2010, 8:40 AM
Yep, DC Quality over Marvel Quantity....Marvel has put out some great films (Iron Man, Spiderman 2, The Incredible Hulk) and no DC hasn't always put out great movies (I won't even spell out the names because it makes be sick but..Rhymes with: Natman and Slobbin, Hatwoman, Steel (I think Shaq killed that character so I won't rhyme this one haha), Ronah Plex....)

This is an age old debate but it's obvious that DC does things different than Marvel....I'm a DC fan primarily but a Comic Book fan first so I like to see QUALITY over QUANTITY....
OdinsBeard
OdinsBeard - 10/12/2010, 7:11 PM
superfan@ "Exactly how long will it take for DC to get on the ball?" - implies Marvel IS on the ball. implying you are backing marvel. you must be chick because only chicks say something and actually mean something completely different. who are you to say what is and is not on the ball? im fairly sure WB has pulled in more money than you have this year..

"When you compare the two rival companies, the results are staggering"- results of what? exactly what study did you partake in to get said "results." and i'm pretty sure if you actually do "compare" the two companies WB is more than happy with their BILLION DOLLAR Batman single-movie sequel over Marvel's sub-par, under performing Iron Man franchise. Iron Man 2 suffered because of Avengers. why would you want the same thing to happen to DC's characters?

"Simply put, Marvel has been generating a substantial amount of films each year and undoubtedly turning much more of a profit than DC is at this point." oh really? want to support that with some numbers? and remember DC are not putting out these movies. WB are. i'll venture a guess that WB has pulled in a lot more money than marvel has the past ten years. that's just a guess tho...

so there, i went back and read it and yes, you do back Marvel. your editorial is nothing more than "Wah Wah i want a JLA movie because i think it will be cool and im mad at DC for not doing it wah"

if you just took one second to think about it it makes complete sense why they are not doing a JLA movie. "hmm should i make 900 million on one JLA movie or should i split up all the heroes and have 2-3 movies a year pulling in hundreds of millions?? decisions decisions..." you might as well stop crying now because it's not going to happen anytime soon.
superfan714
superfan714 - 10/13/2010, 1:16 PM
@OdinsBeard....Wow, that last comment was uneccesary, I am not a girl first of all and I am certainly not in any emotional distress as to DC and their movie ventures with WB. I am not attacking WB either. You really need to relax....over 97% of your post was over-the-top and not in any way reflective of the subject being discussed. You apparently have no comprehension of what I am stating in the opinionized editorial above. I am no longer going to take the time to explain that it is in fact an editorial and any facts stated on HOW MANY films released which include Marvel comic characters opposed to fewer movies DC (whether coupled with WB or not) are featured in. I then simply suggested any readers to share opinions on which DC characters they would like to see and why. I also was inquiring about what the average fan thinks could help bring these characters to the big screen and which comic brand (Marvel or DC) is doing better in Hollywood land. That is really all that was taken into consideration when writing this article. I would appreciate if you could consider the option of understnding that while this IS an editorial, there are also statements made on simple facts (i.e: how many cbm's are made with Marvel characters opposed to DC), facts, which given the amount of films being produced would inevitably contribute more revenue for either comic-book brand. Please take note that you are beginning to sound recalcitrant and appear uninterested in discussing the type of feedback I prompted in the close of the article.
Angelus
Angelus - 10/15/2010, 4:07 PM
Green Lantern will set a new standard of superhero movies. Everything that follows will be pure bliss from DC.

BMP!
superfan714
superfan714 - 10/17/2010, 7:46 PM
@Angelus I'm hoping that's the case! If GL lives up to the expectations I can't think of it getting any better for DC. We will then surely see them move ahead with JLA plans once other characters are established (i.e. The Flash, Wonder Woman, etc.) I would really have to say that it looks like the company is waiting to see how well GL will deliver, and once they do (and I hope it's good) then they can begin to match Marvel's competetive edge at the box office. You have to consider that GL is only the THIRD DC superhero to be adapted for the big screen. Once it hits theatres (and I'll quote Doc on this one)"you're gonna see some serious sh!t..."
View Recorder