DC Cinematic Universe: Learning from Marvel
Before you criticize the title, it's not me saying Warner Bros. to copy Marvel Studios. Come take a look.
Okay so, as many of you know, I am not a big fan of the latest Zack Snyder film "Man of Steel". I have my issues with it. But, looking at that and comparing it to other Marvel films and comparing the Green Lantern trailer to Guardians of the Galaxy (Oh boy look at me, I'm comparing trailers, I know the dos and don'ts. NOT!) and I got to thinking. What could Warner Bros. do to better their DC Cinematic Universe without copying Marvel Studios' Marvel Cinematic Universe but, still learn.
Have fun with it
I can't stress this enough... Rocket Raccoon is going to be hitting the big screen TWO YEARS before the most iconic female superhero ever, Wonder Woman. Now that I got that off my chest. A problem with, Man of Steel is that it was a bit dark for Superman. Superman isn't Batman but, he isn't Iron Man either. He should've had the interest of Captain America (boy scout but not boring) with the excitement of, The Incredible Hulk. But the most important thing missing is, a sense of fun. Whether it would be humor or action scenes, the movie wasn't fun. Now, I'm not saying go, Iron Man 3 and every to every other scene have a joke in it. Now, I know Green Lantern failed. But, they tried to make him funny and too much like Iron Man instead of letting the character be who the character is. They swung to much one way and then too much the other. If they want a good and successful Green Lantern and Flash films. Well 1: Get the audiences to like them in, Justice League. 2: Have a sense of fun and adventure but also have something serious (ala, Captain America: The Winter Soldier).
Career Consistency & Honing in their strengths
I know what you all are thinking "But Edgy! Michael Bay isn't consistent but his films still make an ass ton!" Actually, his films are consistent because they are mindless fun that you need to throw at the audiences sometimes. Hot women, explosions, humor and tons of action. Michael Bay delivers on those and the fun. That's why the casual movie going audiences pay to see his films. Not to go to see something that could happen but, to escape and be entertained. Marvel does the same but, gives the characters development and make you like the characters. Joss Whedon, James Gunn, Russo bros, Jon Faverau, etc. What do they all have in common? Consistency. Whedon and the Russos have television success which is hard transitioning from television to feature films. Whedon is a comic fan and works best with ensembles and gives us strong female characters. Russos (as well as James Gunn) are comic fans, which you can't always get but, they have had career consistency in television and if you watch the season 2 finale of community, you can see why Marvel chose them for Captain America. By the looks of the trailers and early word, I think it paid off. Faverau and Gunn have also enjoyed consistency.
Faverau works best with humor and adventure while Gunn works best with the more odd projects. Where am I getting at with this? Well, let me explain. Zack Snyder isn't a consistent director. While yes, his strength is in visuals which is why films like Sucker Punch and Watchmen were so great and he works best with action, which is why 300 (I looked at it as a film due to never reading the graphic novel) I felt failed because it was more focused on action. Commercially and critically, Snyder isn't consistent. Man of Steel had subtle hints at substance but more relied on action. DC needs more consistent directors like their new Batman himself, Ben Affleck. As an actor, he hadn't been consistent for a while. But as a director, he's been hitting it out of the park. If they want to make their films great like the Marvel films (save for Iron Man 2, not bad but disappointing) then they need to get more consistent directors.
Remember the subtle hints of substance I was talking about in that last section? Well, part of it is that it helped lack in character development. I didn't feel like the characters grew from how they started. Clark went from a confused child with powers to a man who uses the powers to stop Zod. Now keep in mind, just because I say they lack character development DOES NOT mean I am saying they had no development. Going from a confused child to saving Metropolis and the world has some development within it. But, as a character as a whole, I didn't feel like he grew. Lois Lane had better development. Iron Man, Thor and Captain America got character development. You watched them grow as characters. I never fully got that from, Man of Steel. If Warner Bros. wants to better their future films starting with Batman/Superman. I suggest giving us some character development. Which should be fairly easy with what the title of the next film Implies. If they screw it up there, it's going to be all style over substance as long as Snyder is on board. Sure, he's not the screen writer but he is the director. He's directing the writer into what he wants the film to be.
Take a chance
Yes, I understand they took a risk with Green Lantern and it failed miserably. But, it helps to get the right creative team behind it. I get that Warner Bros. can't afford another Green Lantern-esque bomb. But, they can't keep running back to Batman and Superman. I think that's where introducing Wonder Woman gives them an opportunity and then when spawning into Justice League, it'll be Warner Bros. biggest gamble. Iron Man was a gamble because it was an unknown property, same goes with Guardians of the Galaxy. I'm not saying take a risk with Aquaman. But, Wonder Woman or even The Flash after Justice League. Give us characters we haven't explored yet. If you fuck up once then, oh well! We were given Hulk three different times. Two different actors in the same cinematic universe. You don't always get it right the first time (although, I would have loved to have seen Edward Norton with the rest of the Avengers as Bruce Banner). We have never seen a Wonder Woman or Flash film before. Hell! Retry Green Lantern.
I'm obviously not saying pull a Mandarin stunt (I still believe it worked better than what the comic book version would have been) but, even if you do piss off the fans. Role the dice and see what you get. Maybe you'll get a lucky seven and you'll have fantastic films. But, it all goes back to the last section of a consistent director and an earlier comment of the right creative team behind it. Shit, if you want to make John Stewart gay then, by all means make him gay. Characters serve the story. Again, it might piss off the fans but it would give us diversity, it's something we have never seen, it doesn't change the character (last I knew) and It's a gamble.
As with most of my articles, I have no doubt that some sort of riot is going to ensue, debate or even get tons of shit from people. But as always, be respectful in the comments section and if even you don't agree. Comment any ways and tell me your thoughts. I'm sure I pissed some of you off at some point in the article. I usually do.
As Stan "The Man" would say...
: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct
. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and "safe harbor" provisions. CBM will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please contact us
for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. You may also learn more about our copyright and trademark policies HERE