Topic: Why Are DC Live-action Movies inferior?

[KaZudra]

I just got done watching all of the Recent DC Animated Movies and Media (sans the shit called teen titans go!) and, I've come to realize that DC's Live action department sucks.
Young Justice alone can put every Live action movie to shame.

Question is, Why?

Marvel has proven that nothing is too farfetched to put on film, why is DC so far behind?
Batman the Animated series should have been the blueprint for a good Batman Trilogy, instead we get Nolan's trilogy, which at the time was amazing, but as time passes, you tend to see that it's cliched all to hell, All 3 movies have Gaping Plot-holes that make no sense, but why when the Animated movies can explain and introduce characters on the fly without gaping plotholes?

Is it really so hard to just do it like the cartoons?

[GuyStarwind]

The 1989 Batman movie was good. It had a good balance of stuff for kids and adults.

[crisis]

its a common misconception that its DC that makes the calls, but its actually Warner Bros.

but yeah, they have a lot of catching up to do. but ya gotta give them credit; at least they didnt auction off half of their properties to other studies, like Marvel did (which is why we'll never see a truly cohesive cinematic Marvel universe that includes X-Men, Fantasic 4, Avengers, Spider-Man, etc. cameoing in each others films). im sure till this day Marvel is kicking themselves for letting the rights to spiderman & xmen go to sony & fox (although amazing spiderman 2 looks like its gonna be a winner)

at this point it seems Warner bros is just tossing ideas for their films at the wall & seeing what sticks. but theres plenty of time for them to "get it right," theres no deadline on fantastic movies. 5 years from now im sure we'll have a Justice League movie, and im willing to bet they have the blueprint for how that'll work (just look at batman v superman, which seems like it'll be a prologue to the inevitable JLA film). just be patient

[KaZudra]

The 1989 Batman movie was good. It had a good balance of stuff for kids and adults.

Oh yeah, that movie rocked, Even though the sequel got too burtony

its a common misconception that its DC that makes the calls, but its actually Warner Bros.

but yeah, they have a lot of catching up to do. but ya gotta give them credit; at least they didnt auction off half of their properties to other studies, like Marvel did (which is why we'll never see a truly cohesive cinematic Marvel universe that includes X-Men, Fantasic 4, Avengers, Spider-Man, etc. cameoing in each others films). im sure till this day Marvel is kicking themselves for letting the rights to spiderman & xmen go to sony & fox (although amazing spiderman 2 looks like its gonna be a winner)

at this point it seems Warner bros is just tossing ideas for their films at the wall & seeing what sticks. but theres plenty of time for them to "get it right," theres no deadline on fantastic movies. 5 years from now im sure we'll have a Justice League movie, and im willing to bet they have the blueprint for how that'll work (just look at batman v superman, which seems like it'll be a prologue to the inevitable JLA film). just be patient

I'm just hoping they would hire the writers from the animated movies and Fire Nolan, Zimmer, and Schnieder. They really don't have a place in this sort of movies.

[Ratty]

There's a lot of things that go into this. But the biggie is that, since Iron Man, Marvel has had a blueprint for what they want to do. They created their own studio to oversee this. DC is a subsidiary of WarnerBros. so instead of a comic company that started making movies (before being bought out by one of the biggest movie companies in the business) like Marvel, DC's movies are comic movies as made by a movie studio. Which means less artistic cohesion and more meddling from upper management.

But remember also that when the Nolan films started about 10 years ago superhero movies weren't completely "normalized" yet. The superhero boom had been kicked off at the start of the last decade with the X-Men and Spider-Man movies, but they still weren't the summer blockbuster institution they are now, and could have easily been shrugged off as a fad. Nolans "Hey, superheroes can be dark and gritty to!" films helped solidify mainstream acceptance of the genre. The Nolan films weren't the superhero movies we deserved, but they were the ones we needed right then.

So while WB was laboriously finishing up the Nolan trilogy Marvel was busy building a universe until BOOM the Avengers happened. And now the studio heads at WB are desperately trying to play catch-up.

Essentially the difference is that Disney bought Marvel and left them to their own devices, while DC has been part of WB for so long it can't really do that. Obviously WB has allowed a lot more artistic freedom in the animation department because it's more low-risk and has a faster audience turnover than a feature film franchise. They allow more artistic freedom to a point that is, they're still in it for the money. Young Justice was canceled because they couldn't make action figures out of it, and they assumed that the largely female audience wouldn't buy merchandise.

[Shiroi Koumori]

Yeah. It is hard to have a free hand when someone else is handling the movie production.
Well, Marvel animated films are not that good compared to the DC ones.
So, it is a case of you win some, you lose some.

[GuyStarwind]

Yeah. It is hard to have a free hand when someone else is handling the movie production.
Well, Marvel animated films are not that good compared to the DC ones.
So, it is a case of you win some, you lose some.

I'll agree with that. I've seen some darn good dc animated movies and shows.

[Nail_Bombed]

Best thing of recent times the Marvel animated division put out is The Avengers: Earths Mightiest Heroes. Nothing else has been as good, certainly not Ultimate Spiderman. Of course I'm still hoping for a return to Spiderman And His Amazing Friends.... pretty much my fave 80s kids show, apart from Dungeons And Dragons.

[X]

Why Are DC Live-action Movies inferior?

Probably because they are to busy trying to compete with Marvel rather then just doing their own thing at their own pace. The original Superman movies and Tim Burton's 89' Batman were (I feel) the best that DC had to offer in terms of superhero live action films. And maybe they were good because there was no competition to be had at that time. Granted Superman 4 was not so good, but that was due to WB being in a financial bind at the time. They had to slash the superman 4 budget from 44 million to 11 million just to help bail themselves out and this ultimately effected the outcome of the movie. And not only that but several key elements in the movie itself were cut out, leaving the rest of the film somewhat stitched together like Frankenstein's monster. I never even knew that there were two Nuclear men instead of the one that appeared in the final cut! Tim Burton's sequel to Batman didn't do at all good either as KaZiZ had mentioned it got too Tim Burtony    And I won't even acknowledge the existence of the two other crap piles that followed it *COUGH*Plastic icicles-Flashy neon lights*COUGH*

[Nail_Bombed]

And I won't even acknowledge the existence of the two other crap piles that followed it *COUGH*Plastic icicles-Flashy neon lights*COUGH*

Don't forget the Bat-Nipples! or Batbutt!

[Ratty]

I think Batman Forever was pretty good. Better than Batman Returns certainly. It wasn't perfect but it was recognizably a Batman movie (as opposed to a Burton movie which begrudgingly had Batman and "reimaginings" of Batman villains in it) without being audience insultingly camp like Batman and Robin.

Of course if you ask me Adam West is and will always be the best live action Batman.

[KaZudra]

I find it wierd that George Clooney is basically a real life Bruce Wayne, yet he's ranked the worst batman.

The Shumacher films were terrible, but a fun throwback to the Adam West days, Still, Mask of Phantasm topped them both.

I'm just hoping for the day that DC will do what DC does in comics with movies...
I would love to see Superboy on film, Court of Owls Batman movie, SHAZAM! movie, and so on...

Marvel, Ironically has pretty poor animated films but great Live actions

[ganonfloyd]

I have a small hope that the Del Toro DC Dark movie he's mentioned will happen and that it will be glorious. I need more Swamp Thing and Constantine in film, and I need them done in a much better manner than before (although Craven's Swamp Thing isn't bad considering what the series was before Moore took over.)

[crisis]

both sides have their positives & negatives

for instance, people love the burton films, but fail to recognize or ignore the fact that Batman was straight-up murdering criminals left n right, lol
a lot of people get at dc films for being too silly but the comics theyre based on are just as silly if not more, so wheres the line?
iron man 3 is an overrated film(imo) yet grossed over a billion dolares
ppl get at the dark knight trilogy for being too complex, yet praise avengers when its essentially "aliens invade earth, heroes team up to stop it, the end" granted it had the benefit of the solo films to lead up to it but still doesnt change the fact that avengers has a cookie-cutter plot with the cliche "we dont get along, but we must in order to stop this threat, and we might be friends afterwards" [and i garauntee this plot will be similar to the JLA movie's plot, instead replace the Chitauri with Darkseid or Brainiac. then we'll have a whole bunch of ppl complaining "this is just a ripoff of Avengers!!" lol, go figure  ]
and then people will say "Darkseid is just a ripoff of Thanos!!!" yet Darkseid predates Thanos by at least 3 years, making Thanos a Darkseid ripoff. Ultron is also a ripoff of Brainiac, but dont tell that to marvel fanboys, tho

Joel Schumacher apologizes for "Batman and Robin"