For the modern film industry, the concept of ‘success’ can be a damnably hard thing to define or quantify. It’s not enough to make a film that everybody raves about anymore. At the same time, it’s also not enough to make a movie that produces bucketloads of cash. The last decade of high-quality cinematic output has raised the benchmark for ‘success’ to near unattainable levels. In order to please a studio and guarantee future work, it seems filmmakers are required to generate a completely profitable and longstanding franchise that instantly attains an overnight cult following. Which is easy, right?
Its hard to put into words what an important year this was for Warner Brothers and DC, and how much they needed to achieve. They had to not only successfully challenge and break Marvel’s stranglehold on the comic-book genre, but also to establish their place in a market which has been saturated by both new and old brands. ‘Star Wars’ is back, along with ‘Star Trek’. Older franchises such as ‘Independence Day’ and ‘Terminator’ are attempting a comeback, and looking forwards new entries in the ‘Transformers’ and ‘Fast/Furious’ series’s are in production. Hell, even the Power Rangers are getting in on the action, and let’s not even mention the rise of high quality television work tempting cinema goers to stay at home on their sofas and binge.
Very few people will ever know exactly what figures and feedback WB/DC would have previously identified and set as their level for ‘success’ in 2016. I mean, it’s not like they’ll ever officially admit any level of failure. Sure, a director or an actor here and there might publicly express some dismay with their work, but the studios will always describe their achievements as satisfactory, and plod in regardless. But let’s face facts, this isn’t the start they would have wanted. Not at all.
The noisier of DC’s detractors would have you believe the the DCEU is dead on arrival. A car crash. A train wreck. A cheap Marvel imitation, poorly constructed and doomed to failure. To be frank, they’re talking bollocks. The films have certainly been divisive, and as a result it’s difficult to penetrate the very public outcry and loud opinions they’ve created, and to accurately analyse how the films have been received. But if we break the results down in terms of critical reaction/fan reaction/profit, we may get a more accurate picture.
First up, critically, the films have been a big LOSS. The cinematic release of BVS is considered a huge turkey, only partially saved by the extended DVD edition, and the equally messy cinematic cut of ‘Suicide Squad’ has struggled to find friendly reviews. Next up, fan reaction to the movies has been a complete DRAW. Whilst half of DC fans are seemingly happy to see the directors taking risks and to avoid imitating the existing Marvel model, the other half are howling about changes to the source material (poor old Jimmy Olsen…). Last up, profit, which is a strong WIN. Both movies have made three times their budget so far, with BVS taking $833M, and SS so far having made $679M without a home media release.
So the results are all over the place. Positives and negatives in equal measure. And as previously stated, the studio have put a positive spin on things, and are soldiering on with ‘Wonder Woman’ and ‘Justice League’. But there’s a definite sense of annoyance and frustration with how things have played out this year, and it’s clear to everyone involved that changes are going to need to be made. Big changes. The most obvious of these is that the studio need to quit re-editing the original cuts of the movies, as their theatrical releases suck. Big time. But beyond that, what else can they try in order to iron out their issues? Here’s what we think:
5. Play To Their Strengths
DC aren’t new to this game, by any stretch of the imagination. They’ve been publishing comics since 1934, and have already spent decades making billions of dollars out of movies and TV programs based around their most bankable properties, Batman and Superman. They’ve also previously tried launching their less well known characters, meeting varying levels of failure with each.
It was only really in the 2010’s that successful ways to convert characters from page to screen found success, via the medium of animated movies and a televisual ‘shared universe’. Both of these arms of the company have been crafted and executed with a high level of passion and creativity, raising the companies profile and pleasing the fans. So what do they go and do, having spent the last five years finding out what would be a success or not? They ditched it all to start the DCEU. Which was a bit of a dick move.
The resultant fan campaigns to bring characters/actors from ‘Arrow’ and ‘Flash’ to the movies clearly demonstrate the depth of fan feeling on this. Why ignore all the good grace and love that the public have already poured into the company? Why not try to harness it? What would the harm be in Green Arrow turning up in the DCEU? Or a film version using material from the ‘Flashpoint Paradox’?
That aside, there have been clear success stories from the two movies. Ben Affleck’s Batman has met with little criticism, and Viola Davis’s portrayal of Amanda Waller has been a particular success. Ezra Miller’s first appearances as Flash have also gone some way to silence the disbelievers. The best thing the studio can do is pursue these success stories, and try to exploit the good start they have had, rather than sidelining them in favour of trying to kickstart more new characters.
4. Stay ‘Grounded’ (well, as grounded as they can be…)
The decision to progress as quickly as possible to an ensemble ‘Justice League’ movie is a risky one, particularly when the first two entries in the series have faltered somewhat on release. Choosing to expand out of the main ‘Trinity’ of characters so quickly and introducing intergalactic villains such as Silvermane and Darkseid drags the fledgling League off Earth and out into the reaches of outer space, raising the risk of audience ridicule and box office failure.
Marvel have been playing this game for eight years now, and are only now just bringing in Thanos as the ‘Big Bad’, despite having teased him from the beginning. Now, whilst you could hardly describe the various opponents that the Avengers have faced so far as ‘realistic’, Marvel have opted to avoid a huge intergalactic dust-up until after newly introduced supporting teams such as the GOTG have succeeded to create a conduit for this conflict. DC need to learn a trick here. Don’t try to rush things, start and then build steadily.
You also only have to look at the results so far in other DC properties to see that keeping things developing at a slower Earth-based scale is more sensible. Their most bankable property is Batman. Broody Batman, haunting the dark and rainy streets of Gotham City. As soon as Superman starts flying in and out of spaceships to pick fights with Zod, both fans and critics become a little desensitised to what’s taking place, as the human factor becomes a little irrelevant, and they turn away. Both Arrow and Flash have been success stories because audiences relate to the characters, and the everyday situations they find themselves in. Those stories can be built to bigger things, but only in time.
3. Listen To The Fans
One constant criticism thrown at Zack Snyder is that he’s all style and no substance. ‘Man Of Steel’ and BVS were very pleasing on the eye, with well choreographed set-pieces, and some genuinely memorable scenes. But both movies also ended with massively overblown fight scenes, which resulted in very vocal negative reaction. Turns out the more cityblocks you level, the more of the audience you piss off.
This is the main reason why audiences like Batman so much. He gets in up close and personal, You feel every broken bone, see every blade hit home. The most successfully scene from BVS was watching Bruce Wayne stood amidst this CGI nightmare, tragically bearing witness to the human collateral damage that took place. Did anybody really give a shit about Doomsday? No. He looked like he’d been rejected from appearing in the LOTR franchise, and then disappeared amidst a hurricane of colourful pixels and explosions.
And the ‘style over substance’ argument also applies to DC’s trailers. They consistently give the fans exactly what they want to see, recreating scenes from the comics, or teasing key appearances or events. But this excitement has usually only added to the disappointment of the movie. Have you heard of the ‘trinity of disappointment’? Internet rumours teased the arrival of Green Lantern, Barbara Gordon and Dick Grayson. The studio deliberately refused to acknowledge or confirm these, which only fueled the expectation, and in each case, each character was revealed to be a minor supporting player. Or cut completely.
DC are a big company. They almost certainly run focus groups, and employ people specifically to monitor internet reaction to their trailers. So when they clearly know what the fans as baying for, why not try to cater to it? How hard would it have been to rename or shoot a quick scene identifying Scott Eastwood as an established character? Or to actually maybe even consider adapting Jena Malone’s appearance to a member of the Gordon family? There’s no risk in it, and who knows? Some of the ideas the fans generate might even improve the movies. Hell, it wouldn’t be difficult.
2. Decent Bad Guys
One area in which Marvel have consistent faced criticism is their poorer quality villains. Far too often, these are two-dimensional, relatively motiveless opponents, who have been neglected at the expense of developing the heroes instead. For every Loki, there’s a Yellowjacket or Malkeith. For every Zemo, a Ronan or Whiplash. If DC do want to steal a lead on the opposition, this would be the quickest and easiest place to do it.
The problem though, is twofold. One, DC seem more eager to plumb the depths of their back catalogue in efforts to find new villains, rather than reinventing existing ones. Secondly, they’ve already used and abused some of their biggest names. Superman in particular has now faced off against a relatively decent (but decidedly dead) Zod, and irreversibly poor incarnations of Lex Luthor and Doomsday. This leaves a diminishing roster of Superman villains left to face, which may be one of the reasons the studio have dithered over giving him a second solo movie (where he inevitably fights Brainiac).
Fans warmed to Suicide Squad because it was packed full of bad guys. Admittedly, they were of decidedly mixed quality, but Deadshot, Harley, Diablo and Boomerang were all warmly received. It would be a shame to see the studio throw any of these under the bus, and instead replace them with new villains, particularly when Boomerang is the first time Jai Courtney has actually managed to not suck in a blockbuster. Yes, people are excited because Deathstroke is going to be the main antagonist in the Batman solo movie. But if he only shows up for one movie, and is then gone, depriving Joker or any of the other newly arrived villains some screen time, then what’s the point? Pick a villain, and stick with them.
1. Perfecting the Easter Eggs
Whilst a clear effort was made in both of this year’s movies to try and pay homage to the comics, and to insert some material specifically tailored to appease the DC fans, there was also an annoyingly large amount of accompanying spoon-feeding. Poor old Thomas & Martha Wayne have been gunned down on screen now more times than Taylor Swift has written a song about a recent breakup. And that’s saying something. Did we really need another slow-mo shot of Martha’s pearl necklace breaking? Hell, even Marvel did away with the customary Uncle Ben murder when they introduced the umpteenth version of Peter Parker this year.
On the same level, DC may as well have surrounded Robin’s defaced suit with spotlights and let off a klaxon as the camera passed. Taking a marker pen and scrawling ‘JOKER DID THIS’ across it was nowhere near as effective as Bruce’s sinister line about Gotham City having. Bad history with freaks dressed as clowns. Then there’s the scene involving Diana watching what were effectively mini-trailers for all the rest of the Justice League members on a laptop, which also fell rather flat.
As demonstrated with DC’s animated work, not every character needs their backstory explaining in minute detail. Sometimes, indeed, it’s nice not to know what’s going on with someone, and to have assumptions about that character challenged at a later point in proceedings. Audiences are still not fully clued in about Black Widow’s origins and and her murderous past, and part of the brilliance of Heath Ledger’s Joker was his insistence on giving multiple origin stories away. Audiences don’t necessarily need a series of monologues (Hello, Lex Luthor) and flashbacks, sometimes a subtle comment here and there is more than enough. And after all, geeks and nerds depend on their survival in society by being able to answer those questions for their partners.
What DC need to do is perfect their cameos. I’m not necessarily asking to see Adam West crop up in every movie like Stan Lee, but certainly seeing some characters either built up via minor appearances or at pivotal moments. Why not make Amanda Waller a Nick Fury figure, who’s actions decide key issues and situations that impact on all the other characters. And we all know Green Lantern’s going to make a comeback at some point in the future. How about a John Stewart or Guy Gardner walk-on?