Discuss: MCU vs DCEU

Updated on August 22, 2018 By Ken Begg 10 Comments

In practical terms, Marvel clearly has a huge advantage on the production side of things. They obviously have a team, lead by supergenius guru Kevin Feige, with the sort of firm hand on the reins that allows them to hire talented but small time TV and independent film directors to handle their massive projects.

Kiwi director Taika Waititi’s most recent films (Hunt for the Wilderpeople and What We Do in the Shadows) prior to being hired to helm the $180 Million Thor Ragnarok had budgets, respectively, of 2.5 million and 1.6 million dollars. One can only imagine in the job interviews he and other neophytes were told, “We will handle the production logistics, you just work to deliver a great movie.”

Meanwhile, the DCEU, with Warners Bros running thing, has relied on the supposedly safe, Old Hollywood route of hiring a pre-established ‘big time’ director to make several of their films. Things have not worked out so well.

Still, in the end, that’s not the sort of thing I mainly find interesting in terms of contrasting the two bodies of work. This is my main thought: When Marvel mulls bringing their often obscure characters to the screen, many with insanely complicated continuities running back as far as the 1940s (remember when Captain America was a werewolf?), mainly seems to ask, “What is the essence of this character?”

For whatever reason, Warners, which via DC owns easily the two most universally known superheroes in Superman and Batman, with Wonder Woman as well at least rivaling the most popular Marvel hero, Spider-Man, in cultural awareness, seems to look askance at their own properties. The question they ask isn’t “What is the essence of this character,” but rather, “How do we make these characters relevant to modern audiences.” The assumption that these venerable characters need major revamps to allow modern viewers to ‘get’ them, I think, is their biggest problem.

Thoughts?

Pin It

  • Flangepart

    E-yeah…
    Truth is Ken, I think DC has blown a lot with the revamps of Superman. Christopher Reeve nailed the character as a kind, idealistic and friendly guy who just has the power to punch through a mountain!
    Hollywood can’t understand that.
    The corrupt attitude, of a business that knows how corrupt IT is, thinks ‘Well everyone else is bad as we are’, and wonders why people look at their arrogant posturing as a load of dingoes kidneys…maybe I’m off here, as some of the work in The Flash seems to be good with Berry Allen…but it’s hard to not consider the H-wood mindset as part of the problem.
    But for others, YMMV.

  • Marsden

    I think the main problem is WB’s only thoughts were: “We’re WB, a major studio with all of these big name IPs and that puny Marvel studio is making a mint on obscure IPs, we should be making an even bigger mint” and “Any thing with Batman in the title is a guaranteed Billion $ gross, why bother to plan, just throw it on the screen and they’ll lap it up, they’re just a bunch of rubes”

  • Eric Hinkle

    I’d say part of it is that Marvel movies ave their heroes be, well, heroes — they do the good and decent thing even when it costs them while still having real world problems (which is how Marvel made their name back in the 60’s in the first place). Unlike the comics, they also keep the political lectures and posturing to a minimum. DC, on the other hand, just seems kind of ashamed of all that ‘heroic’ stuff and acts like they want to audience to see how above all that they are.

  • kgb_san_diego

    No argument to any of the above. But Wonder Woman did at least have some of the original mythic power in it, and I rather liked it, a few flaws non-withstanding. Batman vs. Superman made me despair.

  • Beckoning Chasm

    I think one of the main differences between the two is that Marvel focuses on characters, while DC focuses on events. “Batman v Superman” is a good example–someone said “I want Batman and Superman to fight” and despite all the objections to that (“But they’re on the same side”, etc) a movie was made with that at the center.

    The problem is that such a movie is built backwards–you start with a scene you want, then warp and twist everything around it so that you end up with that scene. Your movie is not built organically and everything feels “off.”

  • Acethepug

    Marvel did the groundwork and DC didn’t, basically.

    I also hope Marvel/Disney realizes just how much they owe Robert Downey Junior for making the first of the MCU films work as well as it did. Given his track record, it COULD have gone very wrong, but RDJ seems to have really, genuinely learned from his earlier falls and changed.

    DC also took the wrong things away from one of their real successes, the Batman films (the most recent ones with Nolan). They were hits, and DC determined that DARK sells. The problem is, Superman is not and never should be dark. Wonder Woman was a damned pleasant surprise, probably the best of the shared universe DC films, largely because it WASN’T dark, grim, and gritty.

    But I think Marvel making its plan slowly, teasing the Avenger Project, introducing supporting characters gradually, and then building on what they did before, really paid off and worked well for them.

    When D-Lister characters like the Guardians of the Galaxy can have a hit movie or two, Marvel definitely did something right. When DC flubs Superman multiple times … Jabootu must have gotten involved somewhere :)

  • Jacob Caulder

    I see two major differences.

    Marvel says “Let’s make a good movie (that is about Captain America)”. They rely on the plot, writing, and acting to carry their movies. And it’s paid off for them in spades. None of their characters have the iconic nature of a Batman or a Superman, but the sheer quality of Marvel movies has carried relatively obscure characters like Dr Strange and Antman (!) to multiple movies now!

    DC says “Let’s make a movie about Superman.” They rely entirely on the fact that it’s Superman, then call it a day, with a sensation that it’ll be enough.

    Secondly, Marvel make their superhero movies unashamedly. They know exactly what a -superhero- movie is essentially about – good guys in tights getting into punch-ups to prevent bad guys doing bad things. Their heroes don’t blink at doing the right thing because it’s the right thing. They don’t overly make fun of their costumes, or their names. Costumed superheroes have a long history in their world. It feels like a comic book bought to life, and their integrations into the future are seamless (with the updated ‘armoured’ costumes and the like. Marvel seem proud to be bringing their creations to the big screen.

    DC, on the other hand, treat them like making a superhero movie is beneath them, and embarrassing. Like they have to explain at length why a guy would dress in a mask and punch criminals, when it’s a conceit the audience is already prepared to buy without explanation. Heroes have to have lengthy psychological defects to justify their existence, and step out of their way to avoid superhero tropes wherever they can. The movies are depressing and pretentious compared to the Marvel ones.

  • Beckoning Chasm

    I know this is an old thread, but now that Henry Cavill is quitting Superman I figured I’d share this quote from the article. “There’s a recognition that some parts of the previous movies didn’t work.” This is from an unnamed “studio insider” and wow, truer words were never spoke.

  • Jacob Caulder

    I think he’s wise to walk away before he gets typecast as “evil, emo Superman”. Not something you want to be saddled with.

  • Sandy Petersen

    Angst kills a superhero, at least for me.