Josh-da-man

That's a big "IF."

I think that one advantage a connected superhero universe has is that it tends to elevate the poorer movies (as long as they don't fully pull down the "suck" lever) beyond what they would be as standalone movies. So things like WW84 and Birds of Prey might be lousy movies, but as long as they can be absorbed into a larger universe, they are more tolerable.

Draven

Goddammit Birds of Prey is awesome. I will die on this hill

And I rewatched WW84 the other day and it played a lot better the second time.

Runaway

I just don't get what the big plan was. You say nearly the same things I do and you come to a whole different conclusion.

Draven

The plan was that there was a plan at all. So much so that once they brought the characters together for the first Avengers movie it totally worked. WB tried to do the same for BvS and it totally didn’t.

Runaway

Wow, that are some of the emptiest words I've ever seen. Congrats! The plan was there was a plan? That doesn't mean anything.

Draven

Yes it does. For example, in Iron Man, the first Marvel movie, they establish the Avengers were coming as well as the existence of SHIELD and Nick Fury in this universe. In Thor, they introduce Loki, more SHIELD and cosmic elements. In Captain America, they bring in the Tesseract. And in The Avengers, the plot is literally Loki steals the Tesseract and the Avengers have to stop him and his space army. That was all planned out to some extent - they didn't go "oh look, we have these things from other movies, we can make a movie out of this".

There is nothing comparable from WB. If Marvel did it that way, they would have had Tony fall asleep at his desk in Iron Man and get a visit from Black Widow saying he needs to stop Loki and the next movie would have been The Avengers.

Runaway

Yeah, but no. Some post credit scenes and teasing doesn't amount to a great plan. The movies have been more engaging, that's the reason of their success not the great plan.

Draven

In Iron Man, it was a post credits scene and they didn't even know if the movie would be successful. . Loki and the Tesseract were major plot elements of Thor and Captain America.

That's a plan.

fujishig

I don't remember at what point they actually conceived of putting the Marvel heroes together for a teamup movie, but it had to at least have been by the time of Captain America 1 (the First Avenger). Iron Man was standalone but they introduced Fury and the Avengers initiative, then in Iron Man 2 they introduced Black Widow, in Thor they introduce both Thor and Hawkeye (and Loki), in Captain America they introduce Captain America and the Tesseract, and then they all come together in Avengers (where they put together the team, introduce Thanos, the infinity gems, etc). That's not enough of a plan for you?

ddrknghtrtns

Don't forget The Incredible Hulk post credit scene with RDJ .

Obi-Wanma

That was actually the end of the film, not a post credit scene. It was even in the TV spots.

Now it probably SHOULD have been a post credit scene and not spoiled in a TV spot, but that's what they did.

IBJoel

In late 2008/early 2009, they announced Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America, and The Avengers. So I think likely Feige had an idea when making Iron Man and a blueprint shortly after it came out (Iron Man 2 would have gone into production pretty quickly and does a lot of heavy lifting).

For what it's worth, it really does seem that Zack Snyder also had a plan (at least after Man of Steel), seemingly more cohesive than the MCU in comparison to their respective lifespans.

The MCU was executed so well that that's the go-to now for arm arm chair analysis, right? The Star Wars sequels didn't have a plan, so they failed. The DCEU didn't have a plan, so it fell apart. When the simple fact is that these movies just have bad writing (and often, editing and direction). BvS and JL can't decide who their main character is, Aquaman is plotted like a video game, WW84 has a lot of logic gaps, Suicide Squad is full of cliches. These movies have basic-level, structural problems and "plan or no plan" has nothing to do with it. And then when you have subversive depictions of beloved characters, audiences are going to key into those flaws even harder.

fujishig

When I talk about a plan, I'm talking more than just loose connections, but some kind of guiding force that can keep things together.

Star Wars sequel trilogy may have had like a high arching plan but it's very obvious that they did things on the fly from movie to movie.

The DCEU is a little different: maybe Snyder had a plan and the powers that be changed it. You're right that it was a flawed plan, though: I said it earlier but man killing Superman off and then jumping to Justice League was a bit too much. But when you look at something as simple as Mera and Aquaman, and how different their portrayal is in JL (either version) compared to their own film, it stands out because it's not cohesive.

Draven

Right. And that movie also had the super soldier serum stuff which tied directly to Captain America.

Runaway

I sure there was a plan for a team up all along, that's not in doubt, but talking of a great masterful plan, because they sprinkeled on some teasers, isn't the reason for the greater success of their movies. If that's the standard Snyder/Warner had the same plan.

What I am contesting is the notion that "the plan" is the difference. It's the quality of the movies or more the reception of them, which made the difference not some post credit scenes and loose connections. Wonder Woman and Aquaman where highly successful, not because there was a better plan for those two, the movies did connect better with audiences.

fujishig

I'm not disputing the fact that the quality of the movies and the way they connected with audiences are a bigger factor. But the plan definitely was a factor in their success as well, if nothing else in terms of pacing the big teamup movie. All the main characters were introduced. The big three were fleshed out in their own movies (you can count Hulk as a fourth at least in terms of audience familiarity) and the other two had cameos (and Avengers spent some time developing Widow). The main villain was fleshed out, Shield and Fury were known factors. So Avengers could focus on the teamup and the basic plot instead of having to introduce all these characters, give them screentime, introduce a villain, give him motivation, have cool battle scenes and bring back a major character from the dead.

I'm not saying DC had to go the Marvel route and release a half dozen movies first, but they certainly should have went a different direction with the teamup movie unless the plan all along was to release a four hour cut. I feel like BvS does the same thing of trying to cram too much into one movie (introduce Batman, introduce Luthor, introduce WW, insert a dream sequence, have them fight, have them teamup, have Superman die)

Draven

WB could have made it a lot easier on themselves but they were chasing that Avengers money. It could have gone: Man of Steel, Batfleck movie, Wonder Woman, Man of Steel 2 with Cyborg/Flash, then Justice League. BvS should have come after that.

Why So Blu?

I agree.

Runaway

I'm not disputing that Justice League or even BvS was rushed, but that's not why Justice League failed or the DCEU won't go forward, first Justice League failed, then Ben Affleck quit, Cavill wasn't a sure thing either, so they knew they had to retool either way. Joker as an elseworld story was successful. They could have done a much better job, but if the X-Men can start as a team the Justice League can do so, too.

E Unit

It’s a success! It’s a failure!

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/256...arkseid-batman

fujishig

Eh. They mention the caveats:
Analytics firm with no direct data, only a survey extrapolating out viewership
the runtime is super long

but I'll add:
It's a new cut of a movie that was already released
It's apparently on there in perpetuity, whereas the other new releases are on for only a limited time

E Unit

That is the big difference they won’t be able to analyze. The new cut has permanent residence on HBO Max.

IBJoel

Perhaps I treated you too harshly, Chris Terrio...
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...man-v-superman

So my question is: Were a lot of these mandates originated by Snyder and then backed by the studio? Or were they made up by the studio whole cloth?

I do still lay a lot of the blame on Terrio, however.

fujishig

Man the execs are pieces of crap. And here's the same complaint we just discussed:

PhantomStranger

Movie studio executives interfere with almost every movie they produce. Unless you are Lucas that financed his own movies or an incredibly prestigious director like Spielberg, the studios force things into movies all the time.