EDITORIALS

Joss Whedon Explains Why DC Comics Movies Don't Work

by
February 25, 2009
Source: The Geek Files

DC Comics

Speaking of DC Comics, a fascinating bit of commentary from "Buffy", "Angel" and "Firefly" mastermind Joss Whedon has hit the web today courtesy of The Geek Files (via SlashFilm). In it, Joss explains why he thinks DC Comics movies don't work so well. And I've got to say, his reasons are just a bit brilliant, like all things Joss Whedon. In essence, he says that DC Comics' characters are "too mythological and god-like to connect to audiences." If you're a DC fan and that gets you riled up, then I encourage you to read onwards, because he explains this issue in a lot more detail and it actually does make a lot of sense, in theory.

Joss begins by saying: "With that one big exception (Batman), DC's heroes are from a different era. They're from the era when they were creating gods." For a bit of background and perspective before we continue, DC Comics was founded in 1934 (originally as National Allied Publications), while Marvel Comics was founded in 1939 (as Timely Publications). Batman was created in 1939, Superman was created in 1932. On the Marvel side of things, Spider-Man was created in 1962, and Captain America was created in 1941.

"The thing that made [rival publisher] Marvel Comics extraordinary was that they created people. Their characters didn't live in mythical cities, they lived in New York. They absolutely were a part of the world. Peter Parker's character (Spider-Man) was a tortured adolescent."

"DC's characters, like Wonder Woman and Superman and Green Lantern, were all very much removed from humanity. Batman was the only character they had who was so rooted in pain, that had that same gift that the Marvel characters had, which was that gift of humanity that we can relate to."

While this seems like a basic idea at the forefront, I think Joss has touched upon a much deeper discussion surrounding pop culture and our society on a whole. Because this covers not only the idea of comic books and the characters within them, but the idea of movies, and why they turn out good in the end and why audiences attach to particular stories. I haven't personally been reading comics long enough to get a real sense of the character differences between Marvel and DC, but I've found that I personally like reading Marvel's stories more. However, that's not to say that I don't also enjoy reading Batman and Superman.

Taking a quick look at various comic book movies, on the DC side of things, we've got: Superman, Batman, and Catwoman, as well as Constantine, V for Vendetta, and The Spirit, but not much else. As for Marvel, we've got: The Punisher, Blade, X-Men, Spider-Man, Daredevil, Hulk, Elektra, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, and Iron Man. Obviously Marvel has adapted a lot more of their characters, although it could be argued that a lot more of their movies are failures, whereas most of DC's movies haven't been that bad.

I've also got to mention Watchmen, because this whole idea (about "creating gods") is partially why that story is so brilliant (and why I loved the movie). Alan Moore took the concept of what it would be like to have an actual god-like superhero living in our world, as well as regular costumed heroes, and combined that with the idea of humanity and the struggles that these heroes must go through. If that doesn't get you excited for Watchmen, then I don't know what else will, but keeping on topic with Whedon's statements, I think he may be on to something. Maybe this is why more DC movies haven't made it to the big screen?

Don't forget, Joss isn't trying to say that Marvel is better than DC overall, because they each have their own set of characters that are brilliant printed on paper and in the comic book medium, but as for adapting them to the big screen, that's a whole other story that can definitely be discussed. What do you think?

Find more posts in Discuss, Editorial, Opinions

Discover more on ZergNet:

  • Jthiboust
    Or maybe that's because they are extremely cliché and without any charism? Come on : WONDER Woman...SUPER man...Green Lantern ? their costumes sucks, their background sucks, their identity sucks...they really feels like they are from 50 years ago... Batman is the only one with a nice background, charism, costumes, with a great personnality too. Cause I can tell you already that "The Flash" movie, won't be a huge success, and still he is pretty human originally right? but same problem, cheesy costumes, cheesy concept, cheesy name...I guess it is ok for 10 years old kids.
  • He makes a very good point. The strongest string in the rope of superhero movies is the connection the audience has with the character. There needs to be an underlying human element to it all, or it just won't be as successful as they want it to be. I agree that DC has that flaw, but I wouldn't say its not possible to keep transferring their stories to film.
  • Matt
    Agree with him - which is why I am worried about Marvel's movie adaptation of Thor. If the story takes place in Asgard - that's one thing. But what happens when you put him in the Avengers. That worries me.
  • I totally agree with him and it makes a lot of sense to me. I've only really been into comics for the last year and I find myself drawn way more to Marvel heroes than DC. I read Batman and Superman because I've always loved them. And maybe a bit of Robin/Nightwing because of the RIP storyline. But Marvel...there is Iron Man, the Avengers, Spider-Man, The Punisher, Captain America, etc, etc.,..their characters just seem so real. Anyways, nice insight from Joss...I think he hit the nail on the head. BTW, cannot wait for Watchmen.
  • Luc
    It's a fair point Weedon (aka My Personal God) makes, but I think it isn't universally applicable to all DC features (and why I think a JLA movie will never work) their animated features are generally much more watchable than the live action variants (BB/TDK/Superman excluded), the suspension of disbelief works so much better when you don't have to watch Halle Berry meow. DC isn't that much less human, just the material that's been converted to live action so far...
  • Pebbles
    The history of Marvel's Thor however goes exactly against that though, I mean come on, Norse Gods?
  • -Peter-
    this is what I've been saying all along! It's why I enjoy Marvel's stories more.
  • dave13
    yeah, while Josh Whedon is a god among men himself, he's only repeating what many people have thought and said before about the differences between DC and Marvel. I've been reading comics since I could read, and Marvel captured my imagination and interest more than DC.
  • CMK
    Herein lies the challenge in writing for DC characters, yes? Where do you find ways to ground the characters, create a world in which people running around with a big S on their chest, and fly invisible jets, is accepted by an audience? While Superman is surely a god-like character, grounding him as Clark Kent helps people accept the character. It's one of the more ignored aspects of writing for Superman, the current Smallville TV show aside, which has actually taken clark's angst a bit too far, at times. DC Comic movies COULD work, just as LOTR worked, Star Wars worked, Iron Man made it, why Indiana Jones works, and the original Superman movie was a success. I'm unabashed in saying that I like Superman returns, but my biggest problem with the movie is that I wanted to LOVE it, and was let down with all the holes it left fans with. Construction of a story based on character is why we see successful comic book movies. It's why Iron Man was so well received, why the newest Batman movies work, and why (mostly) the (newest) Hulk found a niche. When movie makers ignore that, and start slamming out wham-bam action pieces, with no thought in the characters that inhabit them, then we get lackluster movies, full of characters that we WANT to love, but are given a hard time in doing so.
  • But what about the other side of the argument? Yes, you can say Marvel has more relatable heroes and that's why their films work (debatable, example Punisher, Daredevil, Elektra) but how about those who read comics, play video games, watch movies and tv for the escapist aspect of it? Some people like seeing guys do things they can't do. And if DC's heroes really weren't so relatable then why have they been around 70 years? Really for every DC character you say is unrelatable, you can say the same for Marvel (Ghost Rider, Hulk, Thor, Loki, Wolverine, The X-Men, Silver Surfer, Galactus, Vision, Dr. Strange, etc). I love Joss but I think this is a lame cop out. It's disrespectful to the awesome writers at DC now (Geoff Johns says hello) to say that the characters are out of touch. If they were, people wouldn't read the comics, let alone see the films. The reason that DC heroes don't translate well to the screen isn't because the material isn't there, it's because no one has adapted it right. Blame the writers, not the characters.
  • Cal
    Constantine and V for Vendetta hardly fall into the DC comic mythical cities thing, although I think a few of DC comics do. Constantine is based in England, which is hardly a mythical city. Same goes for V for Vendetta. In my opinion wether or not the character has a big letter on their costume or live in a mythical city has nothing to do why more DC films haven't made it onto the big screen, it all depends on whether or not the film adapation of the comic has a solid script, good actors, a good director and a host of other things. Personally I'd like to see more DC film adaptations rather than the Marvel films, even though I enjoy some of them quite alot of them have been rubbish. As to what Joss said I think he's just discrespecting DC, have to agree with what the previous poster said.
  • TIm
    I think if they would make a superman movie that was action packed and didn't suck then we wouldnt be having this conversation.
  • Kore
    Lets puts thing another perspective necessary for a fair say about both. The point stands that Green Lantern, Wonder Women, and Superman are godlike but not invincible. With the esception Batman. While Marvel has its Punisher, X-men, Iron Man, Spiderman, Blade, Daredevil, Electra, Ghost Rider and Hulk. Of Marvel X-men, Iron Man, Spiderman and Hulk are the primary successful ones DC has Batman which beat all in them in The Dark Knight making the most records in history for a film aside from Titanic. Now heres the catch, The Dark Knight is the first comic book adaption movie to EVER win an Oscar although one might say Spiderman deserved one. Batman is REAL in all aspects as he is more relatable to Iron Man, brilliant guy decides to fight crime (or war) with only gadgets and body armor and the will to fight to death. DC's most real character proved that is can be more then Marvels entire collection in ONE punch. To be fair to Marvel Iron Man was nominated and was The Dark Knight main comic book compition although Hellboy II (Dark Horse) and Hulk were the only other ones. And all had effects that were top notch, The Dark Knight was flawless with only one primary CG scenes (obvious Sonar) and Dent's CG which only had one spot to tell it was CG (barely). The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man were 2nd only to The Dark Knight in effects and worthy of recongnition although the reason The Incredible Hulk was pushing possibilties the most while Iron Man was as well to a degree. From all this we can fairly say The Dark Knight (Batman/DC), Iron Man (Marvel) and The Incredible Hulk (Marvel) are the top comic book movies yet (in order from best to runner ups).
  • 9mm
    You cant count the Veritgo books as DC titles. Sure DC pays for the publishing, as the parent company... however, the creators are allowed to pretty much make whatever they want. It is like Marvel's ICON. No editorial mandates, and more importantly, no characters with 60yrs of convoluted history to adhere to. So saying that DC comics can be made into decent movies, and using Vertigo titles as the example is not accurate. As they aren't based on DC's stable of mainstream characters.
  • Stevo
    I think this is an idea that has been kicked around for year. Nothing new.
  • Cody
    But maybe DC can bring out that fact...make it feel like the characters are 10 times more gargantuan and better than the audience feels that feeling of power and strength. Dont know what he said soundss like more of reason toexperiment than to ditch them all. Make the superhero feel more powerful than the average man so your in awe of the power. Youd just hve to change up some ofthe shit to make it feel more badass
  • samuel
    dc characters are meant to be mythic Superman this big time action hero. Green Lantern a space opera worthy of standing next to star wars and star trek and all the others. Flash could be similar to Spidey films. and Wonder Woman has her own world that if handled properly could be interesting. its just how writers and directors have been handling them lately that makes them look bad. we understand Batman's motivation his parents murdered the city his parents loved took their lives now he's dedicated his life to clean up that city it like its unending revenge for what the city took from him. Superman is a product of his raising his earthly parents taught him to help others be respectful he was raised on a farm in kansas and moved to the city of tomorrow. Clark saw all the pain and hurting in the world and becuz he can he choose to do something about it. but he has to becareful he wants a normal life he works as a reporter he likes it, he falls in love Lois but she doesnt notice him to into the big strong man flying in tights. he has friends Jimmy Pete Lana all things that if intergrated into the movies would make it compelling. He's trying to help but Luthor doesnt see it that way or Brianaic wants to add metropolis to his collection shrunkin cities where he also has the last remnants of Clarks home world KRypton. or Parasite a guy who just wants power his greed drives him. Metallo. Insect queen, livewire he has enemies use them! all have their own issues. Wonder Woman basically a missionairy right? she was sent to teach peace to teach man to love one another. now in history how smoothly has that gone? she got that doctor psycho, cheetha, Giganta, plus throw in a little mystisim got a fun little movie. Aries, Hera, silver swan circe and hercules shes got tons of enimes. and after awhile this mission might feel like something thats not possible to accomplish now who hasnt felt like that? like the job they've taken on is a bit more then they can handle? Green Lantern? too easy what is fear? how do you over come fear? how is Hal, Guy, John, or even Kyle not easy to connect with but thor is?! they have the most powerful weapon in the universe and the only thing that weakens it is fear. they have their share of loses and failures Flash has two ways of coming at it either barry or wally for barry its basically a csi movie and still learning and inventing new ways to use his powers he has a girlfriend who he has to keep his powers a secret from his girlfriend and co-workers dam flash has a long list of villians only comparalbe to batman and spidey!. As for wally its the passing of the mantle and living up to everything his uncle was before him and establishing that he is good enough to be the new flash its basically liiving up to his legacy. hasnt those types of movies been done before and been good? Joss Whedon was basically disrepecting dc why who knows he didnt make and vaild points what so ever to me DC is more well known then marvel super friends, Batman and Robin had like 4 different series? who doesnt know Superman? flash had a series. Aquaman had a series freakin aquaman! Robin Supergirl Green arrow the best animated american cartoon series was dc's batman superman batman beyond all tied into Justice league and unlimited did marvel tried this wit spidey and x-men but dang we didnt even get a last episode for some of them (avengers) and as for marvel movies? half the time they seem more interested in getting a movie out then done right spidey 3 xmen 3 daredevil could be as good as the dark knight Elektra shouldve been better Ghost rider shouldve been better joss whedon is just talking bullshit
  • Obviously, Joss Whedon has a very valid point about DC's mythology. However, I don't see any reason why this should hamper any DC movie from being made, (and here's the big kicker) provided it was handled by the right people and the right writers for the job. The reason why Batman is a successful DC franchise is because Bruce Wayne is a regular guy, and Gotham City is a plausible location. When a Batman movie goes away from that and makes Gotham too surreal to actually exist, or has Batman running around in completely unrealistic gear and/or costumes, that's when it fails. However, a movie like Superman or Wonder Woman should not only acknowledge their mythological roots, they should play to them. Any good Superman or Wonder Woman script would have to comment on how these people with godlike abilities relate and try to fit in with normal people, and develop it's own world around them. A good example of this is The Incredibles. From the very start of the movie, you are drawn into this alternate world where superheroes and supervillains are common and rampant. Where giant mega-cities can be attacked by huge robot destroyers. Did you ever stop and say "Hey, the Omnidroid would never work"? No. You accept that this is how their world works and move on. A good DC movie should do something like that - acknowledge that their movie universe is nothing like the real universe and that Gods and Goddesses can roam the streets alongside regular people.
  • S
    I think DC should pull more from Vertigo and it's other lesser known characters/titles.
  • zetsu
    i think dc have got four decent batman films,three superman films the rest pretty shit(two batman,two superman,catwomen,the spirit,steel,v for vendetta & two swamp thing film.)hopefully watchmen is fucking good,if it flops dc will have trouble getting any future projects made and thats not good you need something to rival or be alternative to marvel.so make flash,green latern,wonder woman and justice league films now!
  • I also want to add to my above comment that this is exactly why I think Watchmen will succeed. They've gone to great lengths to develop a world around these characters, but audiences should still be able to relate to them as people, even though they're running around in tights and capes. Build the DC Universe first, and a man flying around in blue spandex with an S on his chest won't seem so silly.
  • filmkid
    Green Lantern been removed from humanity well his wrong i mean all the Green Lanterns we know was part of humanity before they got their powers. i.e. Hal Jordan is a test pilot, John Stewart is an architect and veteran U.S. Marine, Guy worked as a social welfare caseworker also he was beaten as a kid, Kyle Rayner is a freelance artist. if thats not part of humanity i dont know what is. even Superman growing up had to learned how to be part of humanity before he became a superhero. also Wonder Woman had to learn how to be part of a other society where things are different from her own society. marvel characters dont live in mythical cities. has he forgotten Thor who comes from Asgard, Black Panther homeland of Wakanda or even the Savage Land in maverl stories i know its not a city but its not real too. aint most of Marvel characters get effected with radiation, if that happen in real life they would be dead. i would rather a magical powers from DC universe then rather get radiation posioning from Marvel universe. Marvel also have GOD like characters too: - Thor - Odin - Madame Web - Beyonder - Apocalypse - Storm (yes Storm has a god like power she control the weather) - Galactus - Silver Surfer - Dormammu - Hercules (Marvel Comics version of the Greek hero) - Zeus, etc the truth is DC characters can work on film but they need a good screen writter and director who can handle the project the right way. Yes Marvel has more movies but alot of them has failed the fans and none fans i.e. Howard the Duck, Daredevil, Hulk, The Punisher (all of the movies), Blade: Trinity, Fantastic Four 1 and 2, X-Men: The Last Stand, Ghost Rider, Spider-Man 3. the only good Marvel movies we seen are actually X-Men 1 and 2 (it has its faults too), The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man. Joss Whedon should really focus on making a good TV show instead of saying something about DC comics. p.s. I like both Marvel and DC comics 😉
  • Fuelbot
    When Joss stops self-immolating on Fox, I'll have more faith in his opinion.
  • Matt Suhu
    this is dumb...the answer is simply that most directors and writers don't have the balls to make good movies. i'm sure if A-list directors were signed on, DC movies would rock. i'm telling you man, it's all about the director and writer.
  • zach
    Marvel is better : D plan and simple for all these hoes up in here arue with me but let me tell you i wont read any posts after this cuz i have better things to do than argue with nerdy ass teens
  • Dan
    The thing about Thor that everyone is forgetting is his father actually put him into a human body so that he could experience what it was like to be human. A counter point to those of you who blame the writers and directors, could it be that because these characters are so unrelatable it's harder to come up with a decent plot or conflict for these characters. Take Superman, an all powerful being, he can pretty much throw villians into the sun. The only to make him human is hurt Lois Lane, or use Krytonite on him, which are stories that have been told a million times. Sure they could throw in a villian as strong as him, but then it becomes too unbelievable. The reason The Dark Knight worked is because it was more than a super hero movie, take away the costumes and you're left with a vigilante crime drama.
  • Kail
    Here's the key to a successful story: make the characters relatable. Now in a time where we needed a hero, like, the depression or world war II, Superman and Wonder Woman were great, but in this day and age that concept is just a little dull and cheesy. People want something to relate to. Why do people like Garfield so much? He hates mondays. I don't know someone who actually LIKES mondays. Garfield is a character people can relate to. Why do people like Spider-Man? Because he's a regular teenager with actual teenage problems, not being able to get a date, pimples, tests, the occasional bully, we all know what that's like, so it works on screen. DC characters, minus batman, have no real personality. They're not flawed in any way other than they might not be strong enough to stop a villain. Doesn't really work on screen. Now if DC characters were easier to relate to, then you'd have yourself something that'd work on screen.
  • Darunia
    Whedon is right.
  • Django
    The reason we should listen to Joss Whedon is because he's crafted some seriously geeky stuff that GIRLS can REALLY sink their teeth into. When he's talking about character-driven narrative, I think he knows what he's talking about. What's interesting is that Watchmen was written specifically as an epitaph to the Superhero - but it didn't work, on PAPER. In film, however, I don't know how you can possibly concieve of a JLA movie if Watchmen is even half as successful as it's looking to be. It's a sendup - b/c it imbues unbelievable characters w/ actual real world human personalities, and look what happened to the Comics world as a result (or at least what should have happened): IT GREW UP. So far as Thor is concerned, it's on their slate so I'm hoping that Kenneth Branagh basically completely reinvents what's to date not been a very interesting character. If he sticks as close as possible to the source material - meaning Norse Mythology, not Marvel's pop-tastic comics, I've a feeling he can't go too wrong. How many Thor fans are there out there, realistically? And how many Iron Man fans were there out there, before the movie, realistically? I thought so. As a screenwriter, Joss is simply speaking from an ADAPTATION perspective. Actors can work with human emotion, it's their arsenal, as Downey's character claimed in Tropic Thunder. Give a director a good script, and a good actor to work it out with, and they cannot fail. Just don't forget some serious beat-em up shoot 'em up sequences, for my popcorn dollar. Things we've never seen Thor do that should (or could) be in a movie: (***Alex, this'd be a great idea for a thread***) -Stop Bullets with his hammer. -Stop a Skyscraper from falling. -Hammer off the warhead from a deployed missile. -Hammer shut the barrel of a foreign-army's tank. (Hey, Iron Man got mega-bucks for being so pro-'war on terror'). -What else? What will make Thor memorable, in addition to his daddy issues?
  • andrew
    i think the problem people have with adapting DC characters into movies is the epic scope and size of the dc stories. DC stories I've noticed are much bigger in the situations and ideas they present compared to marvel. just look at any of the two companies recent crossover events (marvel's civil war vs. dc's infinite Crisis or Secret Invsion vs. Final Crisis). the style and mechanics of these stories are vastly different. both, civil war and infinite crisis, depict superheroes going to war with each other over differences in ideology. civil war is grounded in realism by focusing on the political ideologies of the characters and their allegiance to government legislation. while infinite crisis emphasizes the mythological aspects of the dcu by focusing on the difference between heroes of various dimensions/universes/alternate realities (Earth-Prime Superboy vs. Earth-1 Superboy; Earth-2 Superman vs. Earth-1 Superman) and the complex continuity structure of DCU. these differences can also be seen in the weekly series of DCU - 52, Countdown, and Trinity. In Trinity, they are telling the story of how Batman, Superman, and Wonder Women are the basic foundation, figuratively and literally, that holds up the whole DC universe, showing they're god-like status and impact in various imaginitive ways. it is a larger than life story but one that is grounded in humanity by focusing on the human ideals and themes that each of these characters represents. i feel DC movies are not as successful and plentiful because the stories and ideas of the DCU are not one easily adapted or conveyed in the film medium. marvel stories have some of these aspects as well but not to the same extent as DC. therefore, as was stated previously, DC movie adaptions should emphasize the mythological aspects of these characters to successfully depict DC characters on the big screen.
  • Rodrigo
    He'll never direct Wonder Woman with an atitude like that. I disagree with him. I like DC and Marvel. DC im more for cause Batman and Superman are my favourite hero's (Spiderman is a joint second with Superman mind). Its pretty easy to relate to Superman I think. DC movies are a whole lot better than Marvel. Its only Sony who has the most sucess with Spiderman. The Punisher sucked ***. Marvel will never beat DC movies...period.
  • Mutt
    Although I agree with Whedon, I have to say there are other things to consider. I think Marvel does have more fleshed out characters, but DC could do that as well. Think back to the dark ages of superhereos, 1994's Fantastic Four, 1989's Punisher, 1990's Captain America, 80's Hulk Returns (which included Thor), etc... It takes good characters, but also good writing, and some element of luck to have a successful movie. I think the biggest hurdle to any comic to screen adaptation is realizing you are writing to a different audience, attempting to capture a much broader base then with a comic book or graphic novel. For DC, The Dark Knight and Batman Begins understood this and for Marvel, Spiderman, X Men, etc.. also understood.
  • Darunia
    It's easy to relate to Superman? Lol what the fuck? And DC movies are better? Like what? Batman? What else? SPiderman, Iron Man, X Men, Blade, all better that whatever DC shit came out, aside from Batman.
  • Darunia
    Hulk too. DC lol
  • Max
    That is a great thought but there is a flaw. We watch all of these movies based on the future with aliens and things that we would never relate to. A classic 2001 A Space Odyssey, we can never relate to that movie according to this theory. Another movie is Alien, set in the future in a place we have never heard of, same with Pitch Black. I think that this is definitely why Marvel movies do better but this is not a good reason as to why DC movies fail. I think it is because DC has always come off to me as a different type of comic like they try to hard to be classier so we expect more from them. Also this does not explain the Hulk and it's problem on the silver screen.
  • Said
    I think the only reason batman has been a sucess is because he has kick ass villains
  • samuel
    SUperman can be related too go pick up Superman and the legion of superheroes or the brainaic storyline in action comics its the writers and directors who have the problems. he has villians that can go toe to toe with him besides just doomsday. shit superman birthright as a movie would be the perfect movie to stand up next to the dark knight in terms of a definitive superman movie. Wonder woman could be awesome Flash could be and Green Lantern as well its just these writers and directors who dont kno how to handle them but now get the comic writers who handle them (Geoff Johns/ Greg Ruka) and you could get an excellent movie just like marvel did with Iron man. let someone who knows these characters handle them and you got gold let someone who has a vague understanding of the character or just likes them but doesnt kno much about them for real and you end up with Daredevil Ghost rider and garbabge like that
  • jmoney
    I believe he's right. DC guys tend to be larger than life and don't translate well on the big screen. Though I believe that batman is the baddest superhero of all time, most DC guys are too powerful which doesn't jump well from the comics to the movies. Marvel has a leg up in that department, because few seem to be as strong as superman and all have that struggling "human element" which people can relate to. I would love to see a superman movie as deep as the first two spidermans were.
  • SlashBeast
    There is a lot of truth to what he says. Batman's been so successful not just commercially but as a contained universe because it presents us with a down-to-earth and realistic superhero story. Batman goes on a quest to accomplish what a normal man can't and in essenece he does. But he is paradoxically still a MAN. He catches on fire from the Scarecrow and knocks himself unconscious trying to apprehend the Joker. It's those little things that make him human and relatable, his weaknesses are INTERIOR. With Superman and other DC heroes, most of their weaknesses are EXTERIOR (kryptonite etc.). There's a lot of truth in saying that DC are your parents comics whereas Marvel is the younger generation's comics. Despite that, you can still create very great films from DC characters. Nolan kind of proved that anything has the potential to be great despite the source material. I just think they need to embrace what most criticize, their God-like existence. They literally ARE gods, and that's what makes them intriguing. How would people really react to a man who could fly? I think that's what can make them work on film.
  • Kore
    Heres another thing to note. Connect The Spirit, Watchman and Batman and you have three characters with similiar conflicts in different time peroids. The Spirit is a DC from the 1920's and around there, Watchman is a 1980's themed timeline and Batman is in a city as old as New York or Chicago. Different timelines makes all the difference, becuase if you notice thanks to the end cut in Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk all of Marvels character are within the same time peroid, who all connect in the 1990's and later. The Marvel movies match the decade the characters lived in to a fair number, the thing is X-men and Spider Man is yet to connect with Hulk and Iron Man and they are the Avengers in way but X-men keep themselves seperate. Spider Man came out in the years the comics may as well been aiming at. Iron Man fit perfectly becuase of the tech in it is only a decade or less away. Heres the deal why Batman holds the edge over the rest of the comic books is not only how relatable and realistic his character is but he is purely HUMAN. He can be killed but thanks to body armor that we have now he could have had bullet-proof armor. Also in Batman Begins and Batman Gotham Knight we see how much intense training he went through. Thats what gives him what one might think as inhuman endurance but its actually all training. Another thing as far is technology is concered all of his technology is possible even today becuase of air and water vehicles he has and land they all can be made now. The batpod in The Dark Knight is a actual vehicle that is as fast as you see it. The Trumbler is real but give it nitro (it has something better but still) into the mix and it IS that good. His villians are plausable but only Killer Croc pushes it but in Batman Gotham Knight someone could actually become who. Combine scarecrows haulusgine (pardon grammer) and DNA testing as well as skin graphs and you get him. And as another thing people can become cannabilistic with the combination (seen in Batman Begins) not to mention spinal injections ensures his can be real. And if all else fails in convincing you look up Genetic Cross (merge Crocodile DNA and Human in a baby croc) and its still possible.
  • Prototype
    I don't think it's an entirely fair assessment to say that most DC films suck because apart from Superman and Batman we haven't really gotten any other DC heroes on the big screen. Marvel also has had their fair share of bombs as well (critically, commercially, with fans). Ghost Rider, three unsuccessful attempts at a Punisher movie, the Hulk, Spiderman 3, X-Men 3, all Fantastic Four movies etc. What does that mean? It means that it comes down to one thing, and one thing only - Direction. If a director views the source as childish entertainment then that's what the film is going to end up as. Nolan is REAL director who has extraordinary vision. He saw Batman and wanted to do something that other directors were failing to do - Address why a so-called sane man would EVER want to jump off buildings in a bat suit? He tackled it and it still remains the best film superhero origin story with Iron Man in a close second. With The Dark Knight he wanted to push the boundaries of the genre and he did. He injected complexity, sombre and craftsmanship to form the greatest comic book film to date. Sam Raimi made Spiderman a slick and entertaining film with cohesion and action because he had the vision for it. Jon Favreau knew Iron Man was outlandish but he saw that it as well had the potential to be intelligent and entertaining without being stupid. He saw it as something more than pop nonsense. However, the directors of Ghost Rider, Fantastic Four and X-Men 3 saw it as purely a way to gain a quick buck and destroyed entire franchises in the process. In short, I think they need to hire directors who actually care and not ones who are looking for a cash grab.
  • ?????
    He has a point but I still think DC's movies have been better in quality and have more potential. With Marvel it is a hit or a miss. I like his point though.
  • I've seen more craptastic Marvel films than I have of DC films. I don't see how his logic works other than the fact that marvel is the biggest Comic company around so naturally, they would shovel out more movies in it's universe, while DC is slowly pushing their movies out. DC just needs the backing is all... What makes a good movie is the writing and the stories. DC has amazing storylines that are being untouched.
  • Rodrigo
    Spiderman 3 flop. Punisher War Zone flop. Fantastic Four 2 flop. Hulk flop. Iron Man over-fucking-rated Incredible Hulk a big fucking let down Blade Good then SHIT Punisher 2004 Shit Captain America Movie FUCKING SHIT Any comebacks Darnuia HUH? Im a average Marvel Fan but DC kicked their ass with TDK. SO HAHA FUCKING HAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
  • shane laser
    joss whedon is a terrible writer. he specializes in taking ideas that SHOULD be really entertaining (like a show about a cheerleader vampire-killer or a scifi show about a "han-solo-esque" hero) and making them almost unwatchable. and the culprit isn't the production or the acting. it's clearly the writing. any super hero is translatable to the big screen. you just have to preserve those elements that made the character likeable in the comic book. and unfortunately with most super heroes that element is "Action!" which inflates the budget for the film. but inserting a bunch of scenes where the hero is out of his costume to make it cheaper is a copout that invariably decreases the audience's interest. you have to look to the original comic book to figure out the correct ratio of "costume/street clothes" scenes. comic books don't have any difference in budget for those scenes so the only deciding factor is entertainment.
  • Mathieu
    #13 - "The Dark Knight is the first comic book adaption movie to EVER win an Oscar although one might say Spiderman deserved one. " Ahem. Superman (1978) won an Oscar. Batman (1989) won an Oscar. Spider-Man 2 (2004) won an Oscar...
  • teyhtr
    The fact that DC heroes are other-worldly is exactly why I prefer it over Marvel whose heroes are usually set in fuckin new york city most of the damn time. I like worlds created from scratch and having heroes living in a totally fictional city. It has its own identity and it's more FUN. I don't agree with Whedon on this one.
  • kitano0
    Superman is the hardest nut to crack...(Whad'ya mean "silly costume"? Superman's logo and costume is more iconic than all the others put together.) Donner succeeded with Superman by making a good movie, not a character study. It harkened back to classic romance movies and wasn't afraid of the Christ/Superman connection. The latest movie also had traces of that metaphor and symbolism. The question is, is that what modern audiences want? Everybody wants a Superman with kick-ass action. I don't think that is what the character is about. It is about a stranger in a strange land, trying to cope and trying to promote truth, justice, and the American Way. Superman is not about kick-ass action. I really think it should be a movie that makes you feel good. Superman Returns succeeded in that regard,( although they needed another actress to play Lois.) I don't think the studio/critic complex really appreciate a character like Superman. Spirituality in movies to them is always a death sentence. But granted, as much as I like Superman...it seems hard to come up with a good story for him, for whatever reason. I know I got off-topic. So, on-topic: Whedon was right, although not a new observation.
  • Kevin
    Marvel does have a broader range of great characters. But DC has Batman, the best comic character of all-time.
  • Zso
    I didn't read the entire post or all the comments, but I get what Whedon is saying and he's right. There's absolutely no emotional attachment to DC characters, as they rarely show emotion themselves. Batman is the only exception I can think of, thus his movies are popular (for the most part). I think this is also why the show Smallville is so popular (or used to be, I don't know. I only just recently started watching it on DVD from the very beginning.) Clark Kent is an emotional rollercoaster in that show and is easy to connect with.
  • Stan
    Love Whedon and the guy has a point, but really the guy should concentrate on making another good series.
  • Kore
    #47 thanks for the correction but even then 'Superman (1978) won an Oscar. Batman (1989) won an Oscar. Spider-Man 2 (2004) ' that only means 4 (Superman, Batman, Spider-Man 2, The Dark Knight) and 2 are Batman. Superman (1978 Original), Batman (1989 Original) and The Dark Knight (2008) are all DC comics while Spider-Man 2 (2004) is Marvel. 3 DC versus 1 Marvel. Also notice the time gaps; first 1978 one of the first made comic adapted movie, 9 years later Batman the original which is already established DC's most relateable. Then 15 years later Spider-Mans sequel (not original but continuation) one of the most connected Marvel hero at the time, then 4 years later DC's The Dark Knight's realism surpasses is genre becuase all part are both possible and plausable with flawless effects that are real and CG intertwined. Thats a 28 year gap in cinema for 4 comic book Oscars meaning thats once every 7 years at that rate. And if the third Batman reboot movie after The Dark Knight does not get any Oscars (which is doubt) then comic books have bad weather ahead unless Watchmen pulls something off (for fans sorry but again doubt). Thats only 4 in history even with the additional 3 but The Dark Knight got 8 nominations and 2 Oscars, tell me if the others got more then one and what Oscar. I don't mind the correction but the numbers still pale in the sheer number of movies and the real let-down is that is didn't get Best Picture. Aside from that is broke all the records and made two new ones (fastes to 200 and 300 million dollars). The reason I tell everyone about the records is so its not just facts, its also feat and everything behind the mask. You can't get more real then that becuase the effects are the best for story and feat in seamlessness. #51 Smallville is a prelude to the Superman movies unless a remake is mad (again) but I doubt it becuase they already made another. (If Superman is not DC but Marvel tell me but I'm sure he's DC)
  • L
    #50 I completely agree with you. Marvel does have a wide array of relatible mutant who have normal problems like depression, lost loves, trouble childhoods and so on. DC has lacked anything really tangible for a long time, other than Batman. As far as comic characters go, there isn't a single on out there that is more "human" persay than Batman. I have always been a huge Marvel fan, but Batman is some thing beyond DC's typical scope. Every time I think of his origin to present, he is a man fighting the demons he is chasing for the good of everyone. He is a character to look up to and to feel pity for.
  • Jamie
    to Jthiboust, the first person to leave a responce. I just wanted to let you know that if it wasn't for "Superman" you wouldn't be seeing all the Marvel films you see today. Superman is the first and greatest comic book character ever created. The Superman film back in 1978 led the way for other comic book films. when Superman was born he was Superman. There where no radioactive spiders that would bite him years later. He didn't have his parents killed in front of him, thus leading him to become a superhero years later. He was Superman from the day he was born. And whta sets him apart from all others is that Clark Kent is his secret identity and Superman is who he is. Where as Spider-man, Well he is Peter Parker and his secret identity Spider-man. Now don't get me wrong I think Spider-man and other marvel characters are great, but Superman is set apart by all others. His story is ageless. He has come from anothe world, and has a hard time fitting in because of who he is. Before you open your mouth and say that something sucks, sit back and really think about what you are saying. Superman has been around since 1938 and will be still around in years to come. And yes Superman Returns did suck, but that's only because Bryan Singer was tring to make Richard Donner's film all over again instead of making it his own. Richard Donner's Superman is still the greatest comic book film ever made, so there was no need to try and carbine copy it.
  • Groges
    Joss Whedon wanted to direct Wonder Woman. The Studio wouldnt let him and he's bitter. Everyone on here is a Marval fan. Otherwuse you wouldnt be dissing DC.
  • Ajax
    I don't think that realism is the only problem with comic book movies. True, realism is what made Marvel so different in the 60s, and its adhersion to modern day problems is still a hallmark. Still, realism is not the only think that makes these films great. The entire premise of all comic books is somewhat lined in utter fantasy. DC has not shyed away from the fantasy portion of this, and their books are still incredibly good. The keys to making a good comic book film are the exact same to making any good film: engrossing story, visionary direction, riviting acting, and top-notch SFX. If a film has all of these elements, then no matter how ridiculous the material is, people will go and see it. Think Superman. Its premise could not possibly exist out of our universe, but still we loved the move. Why? Because it has all of the elements as above. Joss Whedon's statement is, although well-founded, ultimately false. I would really like the upcoming DC movies to exploit this sci-fi/fantasy element.
  • somwerbtwnblungrn
    Joss Whedon just voiced out what are the main difference between DC & Marvel, not the movie translation. The problem is the translation from the comic pages to the big screen, a similar problem that happens when a book is translated into a movie (HP, Grisham books), a good comic/book is dependent on the interpretation of the writer, director & actor. DC was unfortunate that Superman & Batman was its only successful movie translation (don't Vertigo comics really count V & Constantine were really good). The main problem here is that DC does not hype its other characters - it is stuck with the 2(Sup & Bat), or have groups to stand for its name, they only have JLA. Marvel on the other hand has a lot characters associated with it, plus multiple heros/villain grouping to pull out obscure character to the forefront. This lead to multiple plots, storylines & all. As many commenter have said, its all about the adaption. The story should be "likeable", where audiences/moviegoers, film fanatics & geeks will like to see & discuss, forums such as these are alive, simply because the movie was likeable, a love it or hate it film. X-Man/Spider-Man was successful on that idea, same goes for TDK. The "realistc" part does not mean it has to be based on reality - Transformer, which is also a cartoon/comic franchise was not, but sure hell many people love it or hate it, but it created discussion, therefore it likeable. We are so engross with the success of TDK that we want to have an all realistic (even Whedon states that) comic-based movies, but that is not so, we love TDK for the simple fact that it was likeable, which was the main problem with Superman Returns, "WE DID NOT LIKE IT". Moviegoers, even those who have not heard of the Superman lore, did not like it, there was no story, no plot, the characters flat. Batman, as emphasized by TDK, presented us with a good movie, a good plot, a good set of characters. We discuss it, we debate about it, not because it is based on reality, but because of the good story. Now if a screenwriter can create a good story based on the lores & myths of DC, even Marvel, then comic-based movies would be really entertaining as entertaining when it was read by the comic lovers. I love both - I collected both DC & Marvel when I was young. I like it, was it based/grounded on reality - no, but many people loved it. Batman as a modern franchise, not only TDK, but as a whole, showed to us movies that we will discuss for a long time, from the characters (Joker for both Nicholson & Ledger's performance - they actually outdone the actors playing Batman), to its dark, yet vaguely colorful settings (BB, TDK, BR & Batman). The movie was entertaining. Others writers, directors & actors should follow & take note of those ideas & not get stuck with just following what the comics said or what some producer, analyst, critic tell them to do. Making Whedon excuse (yes it is an excuse & not a statement) both useless & pointless
  • Bixby
    Mathieu, I'm pretty sure that Kore meant outside the technical catagories and actual awards recognizing the acting.
  • Kore
    #58 THANK YOU! You got right to bottom of things, I concetrated on facts and realism becuase those pull people in quickly and the story keeps them there. The Batman franchise (sorry for not saying this earlier) is one of the best by story and realism. I may not have watched all of them but the animated series is very good (known as Batman on WB) as if portayed the character correctly and kept a good plot line. It even showed Mr.Freeze origins and Pengiuns humor. Another reason I may have went on about The Dark Knight is its feat, Batman Returns did a feat as well (I did see it) considering after seeing it I wonder if the third will make a better Penguin (I wonder) or Riddler. And TDK sets up a possible Riddler which I hope Johny Depp plays as but I have no idea who could be a better Penguin. I will also agree that Superman put comic book adapted movies into the picture, he still is one of the best comic book characters. I say part of Superman Returns and lost interest and Smallville lasted quite a while, mainly Superman II (not returns) I liked. DC and Marvel may go at for a while but the set up is Marvel has more heroes out in time but DC has much more in store but Batman (and TDK) made is clear its still in for a competiton.
  • EmperorCheese
    Whedon's comments provide a clear reason why DC was correct in removing him from Wonder Woman. It is true that DC heroes are more mythic, but that does not mean you cannot make a good movie with that as the core of the movie. His failure to see that is quite evident in his inability to create characters without massive flaws in their makeup or mindset. Not everyone on this planet is damaged or self-destructive. Some would actually want to be inspired by what they see on screen as opposed to another self-indulgent whine-fest that regrettably seems to be his area of expertise. I'm thinking that as an atheist, Whedon struggles to write a character that is ideal and god-like. The need to humanize the divine nature of character appears to be more of a metaphysical hang-up of the writer, than the weakness of the character. Thinking stories with mythic protagonists would not be relatable denies the existence of the overwhelming section of the population that has a significant level of spiritual belief, or religion as a central aspect in their lives. That so many people see the need or believe in something much greater than themselves is testament to the flaw in that assessment. I think that Whedon is an immensely talented writer. But he's seems to be limiting his work to a rather predictable niche, and not stretching his skills to areas where he personally might not be comfortable or challenged by the material.
  • Alfred
    To comment number 55. It seems to me that you have a slight case of "Fagitis". This is a discussion board, not a homosexual hangout. Superman as a film, is shite, face it. Superman as a comic book, is shite, face it. Just because Clark Kent anally penetrated every opening in your body as a child with his "Kryptonian Supacok", does not justify the lies and propaganda you have decided to spread here. Alas, Lois Lane was one super hot biatch, but this does not compensate for hours worth of terrible acting, terrible CGI and terrible storyline that I was subjected to while experiencing the "Superman Experience". I bet you are one of those knobjockeys who liked that song "Hero" by Chad Kroeger. Peter Parker, Bruce Wayne and every other comic book character OWN Superman. They would make him their bukkake biatch, more than once. Please go back to your room, all the members of Nickelback are waiting for you there, with 10 jars of Anal lube.
  • Moviegimp
    Joss has a point but is really missing the point as well. Movies succeed or fail on the writing, directing and acting. It doesn't matter if a character is god like or not. Marvel movies don't succeed because they have no god like characters and they are set in real world locations. For anyone saying that because TDK was successful that all DC movies have to be dark now is completely wrong as well. Batman has always been a dark character so making a dark movie makes sense. Superman is not a dark character. Supes is the exact opposite of Batman. Read any Brave and Bold or Superman/Batman comics and it's obvious. TDK got most of it's best ideas from Frank Miller's writings of the character so maybe that is where the movie people should look to see how to update the rest of the gang. Jim Lee, the artist on the series is busy with the video game DC Universe, and Frank Miller are drawing and writing a brilliant story right now called Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder. It's only made it to ten issues but it has all the major DC characters, Superman, Wonder Woman and Green Lantern in the story and the way they are portrayed is awesome. So if they wanted dark that would be the way to go. I love how they wrote Hal and way that Bruce talks about him. "Greatest power in the universe and he makes a giant hammer, I'd make a nuke and end it", that's a paraphrase and not a direct quote but you get the idea. The big difference between DC and Marvel characters is how they relate to the world. Marvel is all about alienation and DC is about loneliness. Marvel has teams that band together for the most part because their "heros" aren't accepted by society. DCs heros are loners who are lonely. Superman is the only one of his kind, Wonder Woman is sent to live in the world of men and Green Lantern has been given power and responsibility has doesn't really want. Although there are JLA stories most of the time they all operated solo. Good movie making will make a good movie. Last thing, in all these posts about good and bad Marvel and DC movies no one mentioned the David Hasselhoff Nick Fury movie. Arguably the worst comic book adaptation ever!
  • Django
    And we wonder why Comics are seen as a lower art form. "The big difference is how they relate to the world. Marvel is about alienation and DC is about loneliness." How about a story about an ACTUAL Superman who uses his powers to get chicks and his super brain to build cool stuff. Oh wait, that'd be TONY STARK. THAT RIGHT THERE is the reason Iron Man the movie was a success. Because a WHOLE lot of people can relate with that, in the real world. Marvel has it's Gods. Superman's been douche-ified ever since "Krypto" and the Super Family became inseparable from his Boy Scout persona. How 'bout DC forget superman, and start making movies of its' Vertigo Properties? I mean ones loyal to the source material, not casting Keanu Reeves as friggin' occultist badass, John Constantine.
  • Glass
    I don't think that it's a case that DC movies just don't work. They just require something different than Marvel movies. DC stories are larger in scope and need to be EPIC. This will make them quite long but it will be all for the benefit in the end. The larger scale allows us to see the full breadth of the character and what there place is in society.
  • Hostile
    Maybe Marvel just tell better stories most of the time?
  • discojellyfish
    I like Joss Whedon, but I can't believe he wrote Alien 4. Awful!
  • The Clapper
    Three words...The Dark Knight One Number...One Billion Dollars. I like Joss Whedon. I loved Firefly, but I must of have been one of the 30-thousand or so that actually saw Serenity in the theater. Serenity was great, continued and helped wrap up some of the story...and bombed. And don't give me this crap about being "rooted in pain." They're comics for Christ's sake...they're not supposed to remind us about our pain...they're supposed to help us escape it. Like movies. Now Big Man Japan...that looks like a movie that would help just about anyone forget their pain! Piece out.
  • Jamie
    #62 (Alfred) Man you really like talk XXX trash dude. All that anal crap that you where going on about. What The? seriously. All I can say is F**k You, F**k You and your stupid F**king Ass. Now I sure you will like that responce, especially with all that Homo talk you going on about. The one's that are truly gay and really love the C**k, are the one's that talk the way that you do u little bitch.
  • ALfred
    #69 (Jamie) Hmmm, I can read what you are saying, but I cant hear much due to the overload of cum dripping from your lips. You want you what me in the ass?? Im sorry. I do not accept your offer. Perhaps someone like Clark Kent would be more to your liking. After all, he is mild mannered cock craver from way back. At least thats what your dad says. Hancock even owns Superman - and he's a drunk black dude!!
  • Kore
    ENOUGH! Everyone cursing or talking gay krap and anything along those lines. I get enough just reading the comments let alone with more coming from people with attitude issues. #69 (Jamie) and #70 (Alfred) cool it and listen to this point. Both DC and Marvel have great potential and for now Marvel has one leg up in movies and characters but DC holds more records and 3 out of 4 Oscars. #70 (Alfred) I will disagree about Hancock becuase if the name was bad enough he had was drunk most of the time and foul mouthed. And not only that he had attitude issues, the only plus Will Smith played the character and he may be a good actor but the chacarater isn't so sorted. Superman/Clark Kent is the real good guy with bad luck and some of the worst villians so give him some leeway. #68 couldn't agree more then The Dark Knight, only question about that is whos in the next one. And to end competition DC's The Dark Knight won the most Oscars for a comic book adaption film (2008 Best Supporting Actor and Sound Editing) with its other movie Batman (1989 Won Oscar for Art Director) followed by Superman (1979 Won Oscar for Visual Effects) and Marvel's Spider-Man 2 (2004 Won Oscar for Visual Effects as well) leaving a grand total of Oscars for a comic book adaption at 5 (2 from TDK, 1 from Batman, 1 from Superman and 1 from Spider-man 2). So to close everyone who wants to curse zip it, you sound like an idiot if you do. And if you check the dictionary (or similiar but not slang) you see how stupid you are. Now to end any more issues its fair game it all comes down to who wants to make the movie and does and what comic they chose to make to movie off of. END OF STORY.
  • Jamie
    #71 (Kore) I couldn't agree with you more and I will be the first to say sorry for how I responded. I let this person get the best of me. The point I was originally trying to get across is that Superman is great and without Superman The Movie from 1978 that Comic Book Movies we see today would not have been here because of it. After Superman's release and huge box-office and high critical praise Marvel tried to get Spider-man the movie made and it took them over 20 years to do so. I got pissed off because some guy comes back at me saying gay shit because I like Superman. F*uck that shite for real. I love both Marvel and D.C. films. Some are bad yes and some are great. I just hope that Warner Bros get there shit together and stop trying to rehash Richard Donner's Superman. We need some original ideas to come through, like they did with Batman Begins.
  • 1-7
    The real reason DC comics don't translate onto screen is because they NEVER get made! Give us Green Lantern, give us The Flash, give us Batman 3 and then we'll talk about whether Marvel or DC is better on film. As well, DC has The Dark Knight, which single-handedly defeats every comic book movie out there.
  • chick
    God willing this will be my final list of captain america candidates until they actually make their selection……….I have narrowed it down to 10. And wether you like it or not, these candidates, these are it, from what I have gathered…keep in mind, they have already selected a shit director to do the film…………. NOT IN ANY SPECIFIC ORDER: 1. Nael Mcdonough 2. Cole Hauser 3. Patrick wilson 4. Chris Klein 5. Karl Urban 6. Mathew Mcgoghnahey…already said no 7. Leonardo Dicaprio….will never do it 8. john cena……"L.A. riots" all over the country would be imminent 9. Channing Tatum 10. Josh Hartnett 11. Aaron Eckhart 12. Colin Farrell My confidence is becoming more, and more shaken since i had read Will Smith was also offered the role too…..I'm done getting high hopes for these movies. I think they just need to Cast Samuel L. Jackson, he'll undoubtably be in it anyway in some capacity or another……… P.S. …I know this might be a stretch, but what does anybody think of Kevin Durand?? This is a list of who's in line for it right now…..whatcha think?
  • rocko
    The reason for DC movies never getting made is because no one is attempting to try and make them. Wonder Woman is probably the third biggest superhero in DC lore, yet her movie keeps getting stalled in development hell. Perhaps with the success of the animated film the live action one can be made. Green Lantern is a popular character in his own right, as well as The Flash, but again no one is attempting to do any movies about them. There is still time to do these movies, but someone has got to step up.
  • rsman26
    I hate this, I've hated this for many, many years, the firece rivalry betweeen fans of DC and Marvel, I feel it takes something away from the comic book community as a whole. I see them, at the cons, the hardcore zealots on both sides, insisting that you take a side. Whoch are you down with, DC or Marvel, which is your bible, which speaks to you, well heres my response, they both do, they both have great strengths and flaws, as well do their movies. I love both books and their movies when done right, both compaines have turned out bad movies in recent years, i.e. Superman Returns, Elektra, Catwoman, etc.. Even sucesssful franchises have seriously dipped in quality, X-men 3, X-men orgins Wolverine, Spiderman 3, but no comic book movie has ever begun to match the incredible awesomeness of TDK, it was the absolute perfect comic book movie, and its about my all time favorite character, who happens to be a DC character. Now does that make me a DC guy, no not really, I mean Wolverine is a very close second, so I feel there are many who feel as I do, who love both books and their movies, so come guys lets stop this epic pissing contest and be united in our mutal love for these books and their charactes, I mean what are we politicans.
  • harm
    I can see 2nd tier characters from DC's stable having good movies. Anyone remember Green Arrow? How about a comedy about the Flash? Seriously he's fast and he.... :)
  • SlashBeast
    #76 - rsman26 You're right. This taking sides mentality is canablizing comic book fandom. Why do I have to like exclusively Marvel ot DC? Why can't I like both and want to see both succeed.

FEATURED POSTS

POPULAR COMMENTS

OUR FAVORITES

Alex's Top 10 - 2016
1. La La Land
2. Paterson
3. Arrival
4. Captain Fantastic
5. 20th Cent. Women
6. Pete's Dragon
7. Jackie
8. Kubo & Two Strings
9. Everybody Wants
10. Wilderpeople
Click Here for Thoughts

Jeremy's Top 10 - 2016
1. Moonlight
2. The Handmaiden
3. High-Rise
4. Elle
5. Arrival
6. Kubo & Two Strings
7. 13th
8. Jackie
9. Toni Erdmann
10. The Witch
Click Here for Thoughts

FOLLOW US HERE

Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main profile on twitter:
For the news posts only, follow this acct:
Add our feed to your Feedly: follow us in feedly

FACEBOOK + LINKS