How did DC in 1993 with 6 million dollars manage to outdo DC in 2016 with 410 million dollars?

How did DC in 1993 with 6 million dollars manage to outdo DC in 2016 with 410 million dollars?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=C-m0ehT3_mo
youtube.com/watch?v=Jf_l3EGQvL8
youtube.com/watch?v=Ydv8TS2wids
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

because it was the height of DC animated in the 90's with probably the best known iterations of Batman and Joker
because limitations make creators be creative instead of riding on the coattails of previous successes
because animation is easier to portray fictional characters doing amazing things rather than competing against the uncanny valley of having real people performing inhuman feats
and probably hundreds of other reasons

You do realize DC doesn't actually make movies, right? They make comics.

youtube.com/watch?v=C-m0ehT3_mo

Every thread.

I'd say a big factor is that it was a movie of an existing show, not a new continuity. A lot less creative work was necessary, meaning there were fewer chances to screw up.

Money is completely useless with no foundation of talent to build on.

Snyder couldn't make a watchable movie with a 410 TRILLION dollar budget.

No competition, back then people didn't really care about Marvel heroes and outside Spider-Man most weren't even known.
Today people know those characters and clearly prefer the style of Marvel heroes, who are more human, to the DC style of heroes who are barely relatable or humans.

Hollywood wasn't in the absolute shit state that it is now. That movie focused on story, not action. Movies now are all bad CGI and half-baked plots.
Action should only exist when it serves the story.

The 1977 Star Wars had one lightsaber fight, and it was good.
Revenge Of The Sith had at least 6 lightsaber fights, and it was trash.

The story makes the movie. Not the action.

This movie made almost no money.

The studio managed to completely fuck up then too, they totally mismanaged the advertising and the theater showings resulting in it being a big failure.

DC failure is nothing new.

You'd think with that much money they could just hire a competent director and not "that asshole who made the bad Watchmen movie"

>Budget $6 million
>Box office $5.6 million[1]

At least BvS didn't cost more than it made.

I mean more in terms of actually producing something of worth, not profit. DC fucking things up monetarily is nothing new but at least that's a failure of executives and not a failure of artistic vision.

An animated movie based on a series has a specific, existing audience to appeal to, and is budgeted accordingly.

A big Hollywood movie with a big budget has to appeal to normies and grandma and grandpa and your retarded cousin and Joe the Dipshit Plumber and HUEHUES and Chinese worker drones and customer support specialists in India and so on and so forth.

This is why these movies will never be more than decent at best. They all are watered down for mass market appeal.

Where do I find a girl this perfect??

That's a man, baby

But the DCEU movies are liked by people, including me.

My question remains

youtube.com/watch?v=Jf_l3EGQvL8

This

Movies are like the exact opposite of video games in this respect.

In movies, story > action

In video games, action > story

Why people to this day don't get this I'll never fucking understand.

but The Force Awakens had one lightsaber fight, and it was trash

I really liked that movie, but I can see why people hate it. You get my point, though.

>I learned today that there isn't a direct relationship between film budget and quality.
Are you 10?

I guess the world isn't ready for adult animation in 2016

well Force Awakens also represents the death of the Star Wars EU so it also had that working against it for fans of the books

I too need to know who this is

>World's Finest was leagues better than BvS
>Assault on Arkham was better with only an hour instead of Suicides Squad's two hours with a more coherent story
>Better Wonder woman solo movie
>Best Justice League
>WB fumbles the DCU and continues to stumble their way behind Marvel

>DC in 2016 with 410 million dollars?
No way the killing Joker cost that much to make.

Except it was a fucking fantastic saber fight.

>>Better Wonder woman solo movie

>>World's Finest was leagues better than BvS
Beyond having a better Luthor, no it really wasn't.

Mask of the Phantasm was released at a time when Superheroes were widely considered just a awkward tink of American culture, a relic of past Americana that was viewed with general affection of the public. So when the film was released, the vast majority of people had no real interest in seeing it. Doubly so as it was animated with many assuming that it was "made for kids", which wasn't necessarily inaccurate.

The film, as a result, bombed but-unlike modern DC-it was later viewed as a cult classic by a surprisingly large amount of normal people outside the classic comic door. It's doom was inevitable but time has looked upon it favorably, which may be more important that how much dough was flowing after release.

To me personally, this movie and BTAS in general, represent a better time for the Super Hero genre. The playing field was empty, the characters were virtually all blank slates that creators could fill up with character.

Now of course, things have changed. Every year we get a whole plethora of shitty comic movies that all seem virtually the same. There's now this bizarre "book of canon" that practically forces both DC and Marvel to reuse the same fucking characters again and again, lest they risk losing sales from the pitiful remains of their readership. The writers could craft whatever story they wanted without a assload of neckbearded self-proclaimed "comic historians" launching a internet hissy fit. Or worse: SJWs having a meltdown over the most insidious and petty bullshit, but unlike their rivals the feminazis could actually seriously hurt someone's career. Honestly, super heroes probably should've stayed as a funky piece of Americana fondly remembered by historians.

But he wasnt a better luthor, he was more likeable, but that's it

>That movie focused on story, not action
But Bvs has no action for at least 40 minutes of its run time.

I genuinely like Jesse for what they were going for but Tas's Luthor is the best version of the character in any medium ever.

I think everyone expects WB/DC to just fuck it up.

listen dcucks I know it hurts to admit how shit bvs was, but literally every episode of the dcau was better than that shit

the movie as a whole was trash, and the saber fight was no exception

even if it was better than the SS movie, Assault on Arkham is grossly overrated.

AoA was just the boring and indistinct second half of Suicide Squad. Boring toy commercial.

>That's probably just the opening weekend. No way it ma-

Jesus Christ. This wasn't just a flop. It was a colossal flop.

>gonna watch a batman movie.
>It's actually just full of Africans and their war games.

You got me good snyder. You got me good.

Because they stricly followed their 30's comics-burton fusion style and the writers didnt have ADD

Because money is for production quality, not story quality. Having a good story doesn't cost any money.

For the inquisitive.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ydv8TS2wids

Shit, I love the EU but it got rid of the Vong.

So I accept it. At least Disney is sifting good EU back in, like Thrawn.

>In video games, action are greater than story
He says while posting a Deus Ex image

Twitchy weird millennial Lex was not, and never will be, good.

Worlds finest had a much better and more coherent story. It was far better than anything Synder could ever hope to come up with. Dini should run the DCEU.

Holy fuck

Well, for a start, the guys put in charge of MoS, BvS and SS are guys that really don't want to make capeshit films.

It also doesn't help that the higher-ups are fucking screaming at their employee's to make something that is as good as a Marvel film. It's the same reason why their animation department keeps on cranking out gems. The Animation guys are focused on telling good stories about the characters. The Live Action guys are focused on making a movie that can compete with Marvel. Why do you think the latest Justice League film trailers are showing Batman acting pretty much like RDJ's Tony Stark?

Dude, the Vong were kinda an incoherent mess with SO MANY FUCKING plotholes that, honestly, I think getting rid of them was for the best... And that's me speaking as someone that actually kinda likes the Vong.

IIRC, Mask of the Phantasm got almost no promotion, and as you can see, opened on Christmas weekend. So of course it bombed. Hilariously, Gene Siskel thought Nicholson and Cesar Romero were better Jokers.

It was going to be straight to vhs but the higher ups decided to give it a theater release last minute with literally zero promotion. Usual executive idiocy.

The fight was great. Rey instantly winning the Force lottery by believing really hard wasn't.

1993 had Dini

Are you a fucking crazy person? The fan obsession with continuity was ten times worse at the time Mask of the Phantasm came out.

>In video games, action > story
You say that, but L.A. Noire would be much less of a piece of shit if it cut out all the gunfight/fistfight/chase/open world sequences and was a straight-up unambitious quest game.

>Snyder and Ayer really don't want to make cape films
But that's wrong.
Ayer adapted things from the SS comic books about as directly as you can in a Hollywood movie.

You don't need shitloads of money to write a decent script. You need shitloads of money for pants-pissing actors and Windows 95 CG.

Good writers.

That's just icing on the cock.

Speak for yourself, I only play games for their narratives.

Because Zack Snyder can't read. Literally.

I suppose dyslexia is a unique way to view the world with.

>No way the killing Joker cost that much to make.
Implying Kiling Joke in Phantasum's style won't be amazing.

They spent one million on the opening sequence and it rightly won awards.

The rest of it was not very good in animation terms.

Untrue, but only because we're clearly talking about the animation side.

DC Comics - usually, though they've been credited before when it was their job - does not make movies.

DC Entertainment, which owns DC Comics, does in fact make movies. It also features many of the same people at the top as DC Comics. DC Entertainment's first credit (because it's relatively new) was Green Lantern, but previous companies formed to do the same job have also born the DC brand. DC Entertainment also worked on Man of Steel, Batman v Superman, and Suicide Squad, as well as numerous animated films (about Batman) during the same period. Many of them did not sell well at all.

So what you're saying is there wass more care put into it than nowadays because they had taken the time to flesh out characters beforhand rather than try to shovel in 7 or 8 new characters into such a short period with no chance to elaborate on any of them?

Yes, that wouldn't surprise me at all. In effect, it feels a little unfair to compare the two, since Mask of the Phantasm was heavily built on the entire preexisting TV show, which added a lot more time and money.