Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
I think it's the opposite. IMO there are now so many good superhero films that they're keeping the bad ones afloat.
People seem to forget that Hollywood superheroes have been a thing ever since Tim Burton made a ton of money with Batman. All through the nineties we got Punisher, Rocketeer, Shadow, Phantom, Spawn, Blade... Mostly "dark and gritty" because that was supposedly the way to do superheroes back then. Mostly they bombed, because mostly they were crap.
Then X-Men and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy happened, and suddenly crap superhero movies like Daredevil or Ghost Rider start making decent money, or at at worst they break even like Elektra or Green Lantern.
Then Disney and Marvel turn superheroes into the biggest moneymaking machine in movie history, and now crap superhero movies like Suicide Squad can make $700M+. Sure, Suicide Squad is better than Daredevil (which is better than, say, Shadow). But there's no way such a mess of a movie with mostly obcsure characters makes that kind of money on it's own merits.
Cashing in on the success of better movies works.
|
I would say this is all true. What I would add is that the successful/good ones can give rise to obscure characters in good ways (ala GotG). The amount of money their big guns bring in gives them the freedom to take risks.
The DC problem is that they've kind of bunked up their big guns, and so their fringe characters will be met with more skepticism vs the "what the hell, why not?" feeling of something like GotG, or even Thor.