Marvel Movies vs. DC Movies – The Differences in Approach

Published 1 year ago by , Updated June 27th, 2013 at 6:14 pm,

DC Marvel Movies Discussion Differences Marvel Movies vs. DC Movies   The Differences in Approach

DC and Marvel are prepared to battle it out in movie theaters during coming years, with Man of Steel paving the way for Justice League against Marvel’s Avengers. It’s not hard to see that each studio has, to this point, taken a very different approach to adapting their comic book heroes, but with Iron Man 3 delivering humor over the more serious comic book source material, we’ve come to wonder: how serious is too serious for superhero movies? And where have the studios planted their flags on the matter?

Rather than simply distinguishing between ‘serious’ and ‘funny’ entries in Marvel and DC’s offerings, we believe the differences go much deeper than tone or believability, and make up two extremely distinct approaches to not only adapting comic book characters, but laying the foundations of a shared movie universe.

Although some claim otherwise, we’re not entirely convinced that writers on each studio’s side approach the issue of adapting comic book heroes by first deciding whether their movie will be depressing, or hilarious. Even so, comic book films to date can be filed into two rough categories, and how ‘funny’ a story or character can be is just the tip of the iceberg.

Read on for our extensive breakdown, or jump to any one section via the links below. You can also VOTE IN OUR POLL found on the last page of the article:

-

The Marvel Approach

The Avengers 2 Scarlet Witch Quicksilver 570x357 Marvel Movies vs. DC Movies   The Differences in Approach

Let’s start with Marvel: a world where fantasy is the norm, and fantastic things happen, albeit with serious implications. Iron Man actually had quite a serious plot to begin with – terrorist kidnapping, the death of a close friend, and a call to defend those who had been victimized. However, by the film’s finale (Tony facing off against his mechanized-suit-wearing friend and partner), it was clear that Jon Favreau had chosen to cast off drama in favor of adventure.

Iron Man 2 picked up right where its predecessor left off, skipping over the serious in favor of maintaining tone. Whether it was a drunken Tony fighting his best friend – set to some thumping club music and played for laughs – or the infection slowly killing Tony being cured by S.H.I.E.L.D. in a heartbeat, the overall message was clear: Tony doesn’t have to deal with issues the way real people do. And that, dear reader, is what’s known as ‘escapism.’

Sure, fans complained at the time that Favreau had once again ignored the landmark “Demon in a Bottle” comic story (following Stark’s descent into alcoholism) for a quicker, shallower take on the idea of chemical dependence and self-destruction. But with hindsight, it’s easy to see that the world of Iron Man 2 wasn’t one designed to accurately portray – or pay respect to – addiction.

Iron Man Demon in a Bottle Marvel Movies vs. DC Movies   The Differences in Approach

Sure, addiction was hinted at in the film, along with Tony’s father’s own dependence on alcohol, glimpsed in a brief home video. Since Tony’s world wasn’t meant to be seen as the real one in any meaningful way, dealing with such a heavy-hitting issue would have broken the escapism, and seemed out of place among the film’s more “comic booky” tone.

In many ways, consistency is more important for success than the specific story or degree of believability decided upon; it doesn’t matter how serious a comic book movie the director chooses to make, so long as they stick to the decision (*cough*Green Lantern*cough*).

That’s why adapting any comic book story into a film, let alone an annualized franchise is so difficult. Any comic fan knows that for the most part, comic books don’t offer an accurate reflection of reality – not superhero books, anyway. There are commonalities, but with parallel universes, magic in surplus, and invading armies bent on exterminating the human race a monthly occurrence, the superhero genre is fiction through and through.

______

NEXT PAGE: Marvel: The Fantastical over The Serious…

« 1 2 3 4»

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: aquaman, batman, captain america 2, green lantern, hawkman, iron man 3, justice league, man of steel, Suicide Squad, superman, the dark knight, the flash, thor 2, wonder woman

499 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. Having grown up with both DC and Marvel, I have to say I love them both. When I learned that Disney had bought Marvel I was worried that they would wreck it due to their *family orientated* policy.
    So far the wreckage has been minimum but it’s early days yet so we will have to see.
    The Marvel movies have been excellent so far, they have done a great job with Iron Man and Thor. The first Hulk, not so great but that was more the fault of Ang Lee not understanding the comic book medium. Captain America was disappointing but his role in The Avengers more than made up for it. Spiderman 1 and 2 were good but they really dropped the ball on the third film. The re-boot was very good and made up for the general crappiness of the third movie.
    On the other hand, DC’s Batman trilogy was excellent. Green Lantern could have been better and I am looking forward to the second one.
    I have great hopes for Superman and I am really hoping that Justice League will be just as good.
    I love both DC and Marvel and I just hope that they keep producing good films that stay true to the comic book characters that we have all grown up with.

    • I love the comic books, and I am a big fan of both universes (although I think I’m a little more biased towards DC, but for the comics. The movies I want because I like the movies for what they are). I understand that many people are huge fans of the movies staying true to the comics, but I don’t think that’s the thing that you should be looking for in superhero movies. For example, TDK trilogy was. I agree, awesome. But tit’s the things that Nolan didn’t include that made the movie make sense. How stupid would it be if after Ra’s Al Ghul (Liam Neeson) dies, they just throw him into the Lazarus Pit and he revives himself? Or If they included the venom for Bane, then the movies just wouldn’t work. The director for Iron Man 3 had to work around the character of the Mandarin yet still have him there, which I thought was brilliant even though it didn’t stay true to the comic. What I think people should do is try and differentiate between the comics and the movies. It’s much easier to stay true within a comic series because there are so many articles/issues that you can continue the same storyline many times. However, one hero franchise usually gets something like 3 or 4 movies, which to make them ALL good movies, sometimes you have to stray from the comics to make good movies. Not too far like Superman IV: Quest for Peace, but maybe like TDK far, or something similar.

  2. Alas…..as much as I love my comic book character movies. DC Characters are inherently more difficult to translate to the screen….and so far the jobs they have done for other than Batman & Superman have been wildly inconsistent.

    I don’t think it bodes well that they decided to adopt Marvel’s grand unifying theory in the middle of making their movies. Marvel came in with a long term plan and made each movie in Phase 1 something you wanted to see….as you knew that all of them were leading to THE AVENGERS.

    They have not done that with DC……

    While I will go see MAN OF STEEL……am I as excited about it as THE WOLVERINE. No….because of who they chose to direc MoS….ZACK SNYDER. He is not the right director for the SUPERMAN property…..I was severly disappointed by his last 2 movies…and 300 when you really rewatch it is alot of flash and no substance (which is a Zack Snyder movie).

    I am hoping to be surprised…so we shall see.

    • Zack Snyder wrote 300 and Suckerpunch. He did NOT write Man Of Steal. So if it’s lacking in that department, you can’t really blame Zack. The guy who wrote MoS also wrote the Nolan Batman and the Blade trilogies, but also wrote the Ghost Rider sequel, Jumper, and both Black Ops games.

      David S. Goyer is probably more hit-and-miss than Snyder is.

      • Didn’t they already have a script and Nolan just helped edit it better. From an article I read, thats how it went down. Thus, “This is not a Nolan movie its zack snyders film”

        • Gooniegoogoo was critisizing Snyder’s writing on 300 and SuckerPunch.
          Snyder didn’t write MoS – David S. Goyer did.
          My point is that a lack of faith in Snyder’s writing isn’t relevant here as he didn’t write the movie.
          Also, David S. Goyer has written some terrible movies, so I would be more critical of him than Snyder.

    • You can’t honestly say that a Zack Snyder movie is necessarily all flash and no substance. Haven’t you seen Watchmen?

      • That is Exhibit A in the prosecution of Snyder. That was a butchery of the book.

        • Granted, the book was incomparably richer than the film but that is the fate of any movie adapted from an Alan Moore book. You can’t possibly cram all of Moore’s magic in a 3-hour long movie. Yet, the result was probably the most faithful comic book adaptation ever. But adaptation aside, in and by itself, Snyder’s Watchmen was a very watchable and enjoyable flick which certainly didn’t lack substance.

    • I actually appreciate what WB is doing more. Because if people are only watching the Marvel movies BECAUSE of the nods to the eventual Avengers film, then I’d say that makes for some pretty weak movies on their own merits.

  3. marvel

  4. I would really like to see everything turn out well with these two companies. You can get the best of both worlds ya know, I think that will do them both justice. You get the non serious popcorn flick with the Marvel movies which are enjoyable to watch, but with DC you get the more serious interesting popcorn flick that is just amazing to see develop. I could really get into the upcoming DC movies if they are handled the same way the Dark Knight trilogy was handled and how it appears the Man of Steel is being handled. I cannot wait to see the Flash in this enviroment of DC films. It could actually turn out awesome especially if they choose the right villain starting off and in the sequel have a more popular type arch nemisis then in the trilogy have the wildcard to end it. I wish I could actually write movies cause there are so many ways the DC films could go and be simply amazing to fit in the MOS and TDK films. I really like how the films titles don’t go upfront with the name of the Hero i.e. Superman or Batman. I really like how they changed it up a bit. maybe thats why Green Lantern did not succeed they changed the entire formula for it. Such as the first Wonder Woman movie simply being called Amazon. The first flash movie could be his other nickname, The Scarlet Speedster. Or just Scarlet Speed with the infamous lighting bolt in the middle.

  5. Also for the Justice Leauge movie instead of forming a Green Arrow movie couldn’t they just use the same character that is built from the show Arrow. I think that would be fantastic as well. it seems to follow the same “tone” too

  6. The idea that you can call Green Lantern an attempt to make a Marvel style movie is laughable. GL was a fiasco that DC & Warner brothers created from the bad effect, bad casting, and bad script. Marvel works because they can balance serious and fun like action comedies in the 80′s that worked did so well only instead of Riggs and Murtaugh climbing a freighter ala Lethal Weapon 2 we have Tony and Rhody doing the same. DC has Batman who is a serious character but the need to open the spectrum and build movies that really work on more levels for different characters. They can do it one at a time if they pick the right elements of comic and film to build it with. It can happen if the want it to. Marvel is making movies that make money so they can make more movies and I am good with that. Bring on JLA Vs. Avengers in 2018!

  7. While I’m a fan of Marvel their movies are largely mediocre. The first three Spider-Man films were chick flicks. Thor was let down by awful casting, the midget Hopkins as Odin?!? Brian Blessed was born to play that role and pretty boy Tom Hiddleston was a terrible choice for Loki. The Dark Knight Rises made The Avengers look like an episode of Power Rangers. There was no threat, no menace, no real drama in The Avengers. The Marvel movie I enjoyed the most was the second Hulk movie which portrayed the character in his true light i.e. as a violent, murdering monster. The fight at the end with the Abomination was probably the best fight in comic book film history.

    • The film and characters of Spiderman , Fantastic Four, The old Dared-devil movie and characters such as Elektra (Now presently owned by Marvel Studios again), The Old Hulk movies (now owned by Marvel studios again), Ghost Rider, Blade, The X-men + mutants and Wolverine is not owned by the Marvel studio though they present the Marvel Label.

      Marvel Studios owns the Avengers and its characters (Iron-man, Thor, Hulk, Dared-devil “though not exactly with avengers”, Ant-man, Dr. Strange and it goes on and on. Quick Silver and Scarlet witch are owned by both Fox and Marvel Studios but cannot present themself as presented in their rights. Fox cannot detail the two as part of the avengers. Marvel Studio cannot present the characters as mutants and any mention of the xmen or magneto nor mutants.

      Warner Bros owns the DC film and characters. LOL Green Lantern Sucked. The villain he fights in the end is comparision to Ang Lee’s Hulk villain. Batman the Dark Knight Returns was OKAY. To me. I gave a lot of parts in that movie a big WTF?! The first two was better. Really Catwoman can man handle guys bigger than her? In my opinion it was over hyped.

      If all the characters rights were returned to Marvel studios, those films created by the other studios would most likely be better. Spidermen film sucked, Fanastic four sucked, xmen seriously sucked and im sure the new one will suck, dared devil sucked, ghost rider 1 sucked the 2nd wasnt too bad (they should had not returned nicholas cage). Blade wasn’t too bad.

      • You got it the wrong way round.
        Ghost Rider 1 was a fair effort.
        Ghost Rider 2 was a disgrace to both the film and comic industries.

        • I haven’t seen GR2 but #1 was a joke that almost made Daredevil look like a decent film.

          • If you didn’t like the first one, pretend like the second one doesn’t exist and your life will be better for it.

            • That’s my plan.

  8. Say whatever you want to about Marvel, they are making vastly superior movies to what DC has been making. Even with the success of Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight Rises, Marvel is making better movies.
    For the most part, I did enjoy Christopher Nolan’s take on Batman, but, in the end, I think he took it far too seriously. Ever read a Batman comic? Just like any other comic there is a lot of unrealistic stuff that happens. Hell, half of Batman’s rogues gallery is unrealistic. As for the movies? In my opinion, Begins was the best, followed by Dark Knight, and Dark Knight Rises was just boring. I fell asleep in the theater during the so-called climax to Rises.
    The Green Lantern movie was a joke, so I won’t go there. I will say that, in my opinion, they will never do a Superman movie as great as the first with Christopher Reeve. This is also coming from someone who hates the character of Superman. He is far too over-powered, and just not interesting at all.
    Marvel has a great roster of heroes, makes far superior movies, and will continue to do so. If they ever do, in fact, make a Justice League movie, I doubt it will be any good. They will try to rush it too much to try to catch up with Marvel. As long as there are Marvel characters (who reflect humanity rather than godhood as DC characters do) like Captain America, Iron Man, Spider-Man, the X-Men, and so on Marvel will always outshine DC.

    • Superman appears overpowered because of the lack of strong enemies and the way in which Thor and Hulk are portrayed outside of their own comics, Thor especially. If you compare all three characters greatest feats Hulk and Thor have superior showings in terms of strength and durability. Superman only in speed.

      • FAIL. Super-man is over powered. Why do you think Batman never trusted him. Batman always had a back up plan because of his constant GOD Mode glitch going on until a Kryptonite rock bashes his head.

        Superman is over-powered. On a sunny day (which is always wherever he is) is completely durable, Shoots friggen laser beams out of his friggen eyes, can see through walls and clothes, moves as fast or faster than the Flash. He literally has a power level of over 9,000!!!! Plus he never died against Doomsday. Are you kidding me.

        Thor

        Though a God he did DIE

        Hulk

        Just make him laugh. THE END.

        THE END I SAY GOOD SIR THE END!! LOL

        • I really hate it when people open a response with “FAIL”, especially when they follow it up with nonesense.

          1. Batman doesn’t trust anyone – it’s his nature.

          2. Everyone is overpowered compared to powerless characters such as Batman. But then look at Batman, somehow he can take on these super-beings. Because of this, BATMAN can be considered THE MOST OVERPOWERED character in comicbook history. But the truth is, Batman has never taken down the Justice League or Superman. Batmans own plans have failed, even when richer and more conpetent people have put those plans into action.

          3. A LOT of characters are powerful enough to take down Superman, and a LOT more are strong enough to hurt him with a punch (even if they lack the ability to defeat him).

          4. Kryptonite is far from the only thing that can affect Superman. In fact, it is no way near the most effective thing to use against him. Superman absorbs the radiation at an excelerated rate, and it causes him a lot of pain. Long exposure to the radiation will kill anyone, not just Krytonians. Also, it is NOT an off-switch to his powers, and it does NOT instantly kill him, despite what peopl believe – probably due to all the bad writing over and PIS.

          5. The ONLY reason Superman didn’t die against Doomsday was because they needed a way to bring the character back somehow. There is NO WAY they would have left the most popular and iconic superhero in the world dead.

          6. Thor died. Your point? Plenty of characters have died. But rarely do any of them stay dead.

          7. The Hulk personna has taken over Banner several times to the point where he stayed the Hulk indefinately. Hulk has been seen to laugh plenty of times.

        • The belief is Superman is overpowered comes from selective comic book readers. Superman is hopeless against magic – he was ripped to shreds by poisoned magic teeth in an early issue of Justice League Dark. He doesn’t have good showings against lightning with Livewire and more recently Ocean Master knocking him out and while he has high durability he doesn’t have rapid healing – Mongul broke his nose and gave him a black eye with a single punch in the Infinite Crisis storyline. It’s not Superman who is overpowered, it’s Martian Manhunter.

          In comics no one is really immortal. Childlike Hulk may revert to Banner if you make him laught but this isn’t the childlike Hulk, the current Hulk has ruled a planet and has three kids. Future Hulk (Maestro) is a Darkseid type tyrant. Hulk is a complex character.

    • I would recommend reading the new Earth-One Superman graphic novel. It’s a great insight into the character and shows him to be far from “perfect” like many people make him out to be.

      Thankfully, it seems like MoS is going in a similar direction, so I’m looking forward to seeing Superman the way I’ve always imagined he should be.

    • “Marvel characters (who reflect humanity rather than godhood as DC characters do)”
      ………………………………………………………………

      Yeah… cause Thor is just a mortal.

  9. Supermans greatest disadvantage is the fact that he consciously holds back and limits himself from using his full potential, for fear of causing more damage and destruction than necessary. To me he is the most human Superhero there is, he doesn’t fancy himself a God.

    • Until the Batman had to set Super man straight when he did.

      • When was that? I honestly can’t remember that happening.

        Yet Superman has, on several occasions, put Batman in his place.
        This usually involves Batman lashing out at Superman and either hurting himself (from hitting the Man of Steal), or Superman subduing him.

        Not only has Batman never beaten Superman (in cannon – and rarely, if ever, out of cannon too), but Superman has higher morals than Bats.

        I just read an issue of Justice League today with this quote from Superman: “I’d rather good people trust me than bad people fear me.”

        • He must be referring to The Dark Knight Returns in which Batman builds an armoured suit, taps into the city grid and uses Kryptonite to beat Superman. Batman is portrayed as more of a God than Superman in comics, it’s ridiculous. Superman could crush his skull with a flick of his fingers.

          • Oh, the one where an already weakened Superman(not only because of the Nuclear Winter, but also because of the way Frank Miller wrote the character to be weaker than he normally is anyway), who refuses to fight back, gets further weakened by Green Arrow’s kryptonite arrow, and then Batman still loses??

            It really bugs me when people try bringing that story up as “evidence” that Batman can beat Superman. Frank Miller is known to dislike Superman, and shows it by the way he writes the character in that story. But even he wasn’t stupid enough to have Batman actually beat Superman by himself.

            • Technically Batman didn’t ‘lose’ He faked his own death at which point Superman stopped fighting. Kryptonite is overused as a plot device to show Superman in a vulnerable state, it’s a lazy way to avoid writing and developing stronger foes.

              • I agree about the Kryptonite. It’s gotten to the point I roll my eyes every time I see it, like a knee-jerk reaction. It’s overused and not even used well.

                I get the same feeling with Lex. The only times I’ve enjoyed a story with him in it was ‘All-star Superman’, and ‘Public Enemies’. The rest of the time his presence just seems forced for the sake of having him there, and because they couldn’t think of a new villain.

  10. Bring on DOOMSDAY (in the future ofc) :ppp

    LOTR’S Style!

  11. I think the underlying question is “what exactly do comic BOOK fans want from comic book MOVIES”. They are both very different mediums and as widely accepted now, there are things that work well in comic books that just wouldn’t work in a movie (I reference the first X-Men movie and the line about their costumes).

    If you look at the best comic book movies, the reason the were popular with fans and did well at the box office is because they respected the original source material, however they weren’t handcuffed by it. Nolan’s Batman trilogy, X-Men 1 & 2 and Blade are examples where the essence of the character and the world they inhabit was used as a backdrop to tell an original story, sometimes using elements of fan favourite storylines from their respective comics.

    l think too many comic book fans have a tendency to just want their favourite storyline made into live action. I think that this is a very limited and short-sighted view sometimes. Surely it would be better to tell an original story with the character in the live action medium, utilising elements from certain storylines (as Nolan did with the Bat trilogy).

    In terms of the difference of approach between the two studios, I think the main reason why Marvel’s movies have been more successful is purely because they were part of a plan; it was always thought that The Avengers would be impossible to make; too many heroes/egos/personalities to balance in a live action movie. Obviously Whedon proved that that was entirely possible. However, the ground work had already laid by the preceding movies making Whedon’s job a little easier.

    Warner/DC never seemed to have a long term plan beyond “let’s make a movie and if it’s successful we’ll make another one”. The DC-verse and Marvel-verse are very very different and it would be a mistake to try and make the movies using similar templates. Apart from DC’s holy trinity (Supes, Bats and Wonder Woman) the majority of their other heroes aren’t as well known to the none comic book reading public (with the exception of possibly The Flash). Thor has shown that less well known characters can be well received and do well in a movie of their own if handled correctly, which Green Lantern, Daredevil Ghost Rider and Elektra (to name a few) weren’t. Also, in the DC-verse, their heroes are pretty much unconditionally loved by the public in their respective cities. Match that with the troubles/conflict that Spiderman or the X-Men have had to put up with over the years and you see a very different set of rule and circumstance that divides the two verses.

    Growing up, I found myself reading more Marvel comics than DC as I found it easier to relate to the characters and situations that Marvel published. But as there are some many different heroes to choose from these days, I think the best approach to turning them into movies would be to take them as individual projects rather than throwing a blanket over each character as a certain type (ie anti-hero, dark/broody/ comical etc).

    Sorry for the essay!! lol

    • Can I get an amen?

    • As I said in my original post, it’s easier to like the Marvel heroes over the DC heroes because Marvel portrays their heroes as real people with real problems. DC has always seemed to make their characters more god-like, and this, to me, makes them much less interesting.
      Superman is a prime example of this. Here is a character who has almost all the powers of any regular hero, yet seems to have very few, if any, actual human problems. I’ve read quite a few different stories from Superman’s comics, and no matter what the story was, he always came off bland and boring. You always knew that, no matter what the odds, Superman was going to overcome them.
      In Marvel comics, heroes may end up triumphing in the end a vast majority of the time, but it takes them some time to get there. In many cases (especially with characters like the X-Men) they have to overcome prejudice against them, as well as try to deal with whatever baddie comes their way. Again: Marvel shows humanity, DC basically gods.

  12. Shazizznat, the real question is which company has got the cojones make a Wolverine film like Benjamin Button.. super-human ability way in background – unfocused, the issue of dealing with death in the foreground – sharp. How you wanna go Logie ? In shame like the first film ? wuss.

  13. When it comes to the films, I have appreciated both studios’ approaches to films whether successful or not.

    Good DC films (in my opinion) – Superman (to a lesser extent 2-4), Batman (to a far lesser extent Batman Returns etc.), the newer Batman films.

    Good Marvel films – Spiderman (2 and 3 to a lesser extent), The Amazing Spiderman, Captain America, Iron Man 1 and 2 (3 less so), Thor, to a lesser extent the Hulk films….I believe Marvel dropped the ball by not putting out either a Hawkeye or Black Widow film…even better make a film with both co-starring.

    • So you didn’t like Swampthing then?

  14. I prefer DC approach. I like the story based approach, I think the combination of Nolan (who is know for his story driven approach) and SNyder who is known for his fantastic visuals, bodes well for MOS and all early reactions has been overwhelmingly positive for the film.
    I hope we get a flash and wonder woman Movie too as it would be awesome.

  15. Both have good and bad. Marvel at least has had success with more than one hero in live action movies. DC has only made attempt for comic book films, with success, from only the two biggest of their heroes. Green Lantern did not as successful. Many deem it as a failure. DC has yet to try to make a movie about any of their other characters.

  16. Marvel movies have always entertained me more than any dc movies…ofcourse marvel did lose the plot a little with the spider-man reboot…but that aside…avengers, iron-man, spiderman, and Xmen (especially) were extremely enjoyable…but again opinions vary, i am that kind of a person who sees movies to escape from earthly troubles, tensions…going to a theatre and seeing something serious, or cynical, just ruins my weekend eve…peace and cheers to all…

  17. What is the point?
    As long as they just make some good movies that tell great stories.

    Everybody win if both companies make some sincerely good movies. We as an audience lose if they start making movies like Clash of the Titans!

    When that is said. DC/WB should just put current plans of a Superman 2 on hold, and start making a new and better Hellblazer movie.

  18. I take it on a film by film basis. For me there hasn’t been a good DC movie since Keaton was Batman. Which is a shame because I love the DC books. Especially Scott Snyder’s stuff, brilliant. But the Nolan stuff is horrible. Except for Heath Ledger’s joker, everything surrounding him in the Batman movies was crap. I haven’t seen Man of Steel yet but don’t have much hope of anything better.

    As far as Marvel, I liked the last Hulk movie, though it was not great. Thor was pretty good. The first Iron Man movie was good. Captain America was the best superhero movie of all time, something which took me by surprise. And Avengers was a horrible mess. All other superhero movies aren’t even worth mentioning.

    But, that’s just my opinion. I’m sure other fans will think I’m crazy for my picks but that’s ok. However, just once, I’d like to see the studios just make the movie like the comic book. just straight from the pages. I think they’d be surprised about it’s success. There are some great comic book writers in the business today and I think if they got a chance to write for a movie it would be pretty dang awesome.

    • “The Nolan stuff,” though set in a more realistic world devoid of superhuman powers, was actually the most spot-on silver screen rendition of the comics’ dark tone to date, even if I must admit I preferred Burton’s Catwoman. Man of Steel looks promising beyond any hope. Thor was a

      • (cont’d) Thor was a cheesy flick with corny dialogue, plastic-looking weapons and armor and a hero who looked and behaved like the dumbest supermodel. Captain America was a joke almost on par with Daredevil, with even more plastic-looking costumes and make-up (Red Skull). Avengers was undoubtedly the best MCU movie so far, overflowing with trademark Whedon witty dialogue and terrific action scenes that literally were classic comic book action coming to life before our very eyes.

  19. you know this is my favorate movie

    • Uh, OK. Which one?

  20. I love both DC and MARVEL.But seeing all films so far, the DC CINEMATIC (not comicbook/animated, but cinematic) universe is more serious and grounded than MARVEL’s cinematic universe.And this statement is generalised.There are serious moments in MARVEL films.But to be honest, I watch MARVEL films for more fun than realism , and I watch DC films for more realism than fun.

    We have to admit that the “fun” I mentioned, or “cartoon-like scenarios” are what boosted the Avengers’ income and popularity so much.I loved the movie, but felt how much it resembled a fun-and-games animated feature.

  21. I love both DC and MARVEL.But seeing all films so far, the DC CINEMATIC (not comicbook/animated, but cinematic) universe is more serious and grounded than MARVEL’s cinematic universe.And this statement is generalised.There are serious moments in MARVEL films.But to be honest, I watch MARVEL films for more fun than realism , and I watch DC films for more realism than fun.

    We have to admit that the “fun” I mentioned, or “cartoon-like scenarios” are what boosted the Avengers’ income and popularity so much.I loved the movie, but felt how much it resembled a fun-and-games animated feature.

  22. The truth is I find DC stories to have more depth and more respect for the character, while marvel heroes have superficial/cliched flaws (alcoholicism,really?) DC characters have genunine canandrums stemming from their powers or talents that is on a level marvel doesnt touch. Marvel is for kids or bandwagoners who want to appear as experts on comic books but have never read one or barely read any.
    While dc gives real thought and credibility to their characters, i have seen nothing from marvel as intelligent and fulfilling as the dark knight and their never will be one because marvel are not that ambitious in their movies. They make action comedies, while dc makes credible action flicks that happen to star a comic book character.

  23. I prefer dc but they have not done enough with their characters, hopefully with Man of steels success their will no longer be any excuses for not making more characters. I would love to see a flash or wonder woman movie given the same level of investment and respect as the dark knight and Man of steel.

  24. Sometimes I like funny, sometimes I like drama.

    Sometimes I like chicken, sometimes I like beef.

    • Possibly the best comment on this thread.

  25. I think they had the right idea for Man of Steel but I don’t think they got the balance quite right. It got so dark and serious towards the end, (SPOILER ALERT) with half of Metropolis getting destroyed and Superman being all tortured after having been forced to kill Zod, I felt like all the hope and optimism stuff they were setting up in the first part of the film was sorta defeated. While I still found the movie highly enjoyable, I do think it kind of shot itself in the foot in that respect.

  26. And I don’t think you’re really talking about the “DC approach”, you’re just talking about Nolan’s approach to Batman that many have tried to imitate with little success. The Nolan/Batman approach only works with Batman. Why? BECAUSE HE’S BATMAN!!!!!!!!

    • Well, it seems to work with Supes too, if you take a look at the box office…

    • I don`t think Nolan`s Batman is “the Batman”. He don`t have the heroic willpower that makes him more then a bored rich guy in a costume, like Green Hornet.
      They will probably do the same with Superman: a good film, but of a completely different character, with a lot of propaganda in all medias to make the fans “swallow” it.

      • Oh, so who did save Gotham 3 times, putting his own life on the line to protect the city, then?

  27. MARVEL always fight with each other

    • So…? Are you trying to make a point?

  28. I don’t read the comics. I don’t care if they stay true to them. Call me a casual, but the DC film Universe sucks. Marvel film Universe has been killing it. Look at the box office totals. When Marvel does the dark and broody thing, the money plummets. Punisher 1 had 13 mil opening night and War Zone 4 mil. Iron man 3 and Avengers approaching 200 million. People care more about the theatre shootings involved with the Batman movies than the actual movies.

    Superman is the most overrated, overpowered rank character point blank period. Yawn. Hulk and Thor are both super powered too but have enemies and nerfs that cancel their abilities, where as supes its “Oh man, I am losing power with this rock! Agh!” I mean come on.

    The Avengers was awesome and to the person who said Hawkeye and Black Widow needed their own movies, severely disagree. Hawkeye was unbearable as a char in Avengers,and his own box office movie would probably gross what Punisher’s did. I love that Widow, Fury, SHIELD, etc were used as supporting roles in other movies and tied into their own bigger roles in Avengers rather than keep splitting movies up for them. Also loved that Whedon decided to use supporting chars from other movies (Pepper Potts, Jarvis, the scientist from Thor, etc.) as it really brought it altogether. I admit there were parts of it that were stupid (Hurr I hit you in the head really hard! or suddenly Hulk can control his powers) but overall the movie kicked ass and I can’t wait for Avengers 2.

    • Superman’s not overpowered, it just seems that way because the only villains he fought that were on his level in the movies were Zod in II and Man of Steel, and his clone in Superman IV, which all were Kryptonian, in the comics and cartoons he also has Mongul, Doomsday, Darkseid (DC’s Thanos), Parasite, Lobo, and more.

  29. To be fair, Tony’s alcoholism was set to be addressed in Iron Man 3, but the studio said no so that they could still market to children

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!