Comics: Marvel definitely and by a fair margin at the moment. Perhaps when DC finish their game of moving chairs with their creators and their editors actually allow them to create we would have a better product across the board.
Games- DC
Animation: DC by a large margin. I don't know why Marvel feel the need to cancel their good shows and replace them with kid friendly nonsense.
Movies: Marvel. It's not even a competition at the moment.
Originally posted by Newjak
I agree I thought they were quality movies as well. I own all of Nolan's trilogy.Most people can do what you did though and make any movie sound much deeper than it is. They are personal opinions. who you feel these moments make a movie much less safe. Yes Nolan tried to do things to produce moral grey areas, that doesn't mean he succeeded or succeeded as well as you are thinking.
Also if you're going to use all three of the Nolan Movies I'm going to use all the Avengers Tie-In movies which all had great acting, solid moral dilemmas and great build up the Avengers which carried a lot of that stuff over from the tie-ins.
Did I make the Batman movies sound a lot deeper than they were? I actually thought that I was selling them short 😛
I never brushed on topics such as what heroes mean to everyday people, his obligation to the law versus his obligation to the people, the difference a human man can make. And the "better" grey areas and moral complexities show up once you're dealing with Alfred's burning of Rachel's letter. There you have not only a struggle of right and wrong, but his obligation to Bruce's parents versus his obligation to Bruce. Which in turn is brought up in the third one.
Are you sure you want to use all of the tie-in movies? Most of those were pretty terrible in my opinion and can only hurt the average of the Avengers. Thor had some really great stuff (barring the humor and pacing) and I guess Iron Man 1 was decent. I had no expectations of Captain America and it still managed to let me down. At best it fails at being charming and at its worst it's just straight up making light of the men who fought in WW2. The heroes all felt awkwardly misplaced outside of Iron Man, and that movie felt like "Capitalism: Unbridled" at most turns.
There's stuff I couldn't stand in the Batman movies either, like the completely unwarranted focus on his cars and bikes or whatever. Felt like a damn commercial whenever Lucius brought out his phone 😆
But those annoyances aside it didn't insult me nearly as much as Avengers' attempt to jam superficial American values down my throat.
Our opinions vary, no doubt, but there's one issue I feel that we can't really debate. And that's Nolan's willingness to try (and fail as you might feel he did) and deal with tougher/more real issues versus Whedon's more shallow (but much truer to the comics) approach to the movies.
They're different movies and we're looking for different things, but I hope we can at least agree on my last paragraph 🙂
Look to Philsophia's posts for a more eloquent conveyance of my opinion 😆
Originally posted by Golgo13Indeed, pre-crisis DC over-the-top goes without saying. It was one of the reasons I veered toward Marvel, because Silver Age had "more realistic" strength levels. But in more modern times, yeah, Marvel has been upping its ante in "oh yeah, look what my characters can do." Not that they didn't have the occasional hyperbole then; but it does seem more blatant now. And paradoxically, this is why I started veering more toward DC: at least they've been consistent, plus their writing, character development and art have much improved, imo.
Pre-Crisis went over the top a lot for characters like Legion and Superboy. DC still has a lot of over the top feats and Marvel is right in the thick of things, if you include Hyperion's feat.
Originally posted by PhilosophíaNow and then, a movie has what I call a 'perfect moment': everything comes together about a scene and it just engulfs you. Magneto lifting the sub was one such moment (offhand, another one that comes to my mind was in '2012', when President Glover rises from the dust and sees a gigantic wall of water carrying an aircraft carrier rushing toward him; oh, also, in 'Superman Returns', that whole airplane scene, especially when Superman punches through the torn-loose wing...simply awesome).
...when Magneto lifted the submarine...
Originally posted by currymanThe main difference between you and me is that for you it sounds like Gritty equals tough moral issues, I don't really see it that way.
Did I make the Batman movies sound a lot deeper than they were? I actually thought that I was selling them short 😛I never brushed on topics such as what heroes mean to everyday people, his obligation to the law versus his obligation to the people, the difference a human man can make. And the "better" grey areas and moral complexities show up once you're dealing with Alfred's burning of Rachel's letter. There you have not only a struggle of right and wrong, but his obligation to Bruce's parents versus his obligation to Bruce. Which in turn is brought up in the third one.
Are you sure you want to use all of the tie-in movies? Most of those were pretty terrible in my opinion and can only hurt the average of the Avengers. Thor had some really great stuff (barring the humor and pacing) and I guess Iron Man 1 was decent. I had no expectations of Captain America and it still managed to let me down. At best it fails at being charming and at its worst it's just straight up making light of the men who fought in WW2. The heroes all felt awkwardly misplaced outside of Iron Man, and that movie felt like "Capitalism: Unbridled" at most turns.
There's stuff I couldn't stand in the Batman movies either, like the completely unwarranted focus on his cars and bikes or whatever. Felt like a damn commercial whenever Lucius brought out his phone 😆
But those annoyances aside it didn't insult me nearly as much as Avengers' attempt to jam superficial American values down my throat.
Our opinions vary, no doubt, but there's one issue I feel that we can't really debate. And that's Nolan's willingness to try (and fail as you might feel he did) and deal with tougher/more real issues versus Whedon's more shallow (but much truer to the comics) approach to the movies.
They're different movies and we're looking for different things, but I hope we can at least agree on my last paragraph 🙂
Look to Philsophia's posts for a more eloquent conveyance of my opinion 😆
Just because Nolan went for a more 'realistic approach' and a more gritty approach does not in and of itself mean to me he produced a less safe movie especially now when those types of movies have become common place. Even more so when I think back to the Burton films who did 2 decades ago minus the realistic part at times.
And just because the Avengers didn't go super gritty does not mean they played it safe.
From there you and I can have varying degrees of how we felt each movie played it more or less safe than others. I might even agree with you overall that the Batman series may have played some things less safe, but that does not mean I believe the Avengers was this candyland sort of place like you.
Originally posted by Endless MikeThere is a quaintness about it, also how the hero's name was always in bold type, and how the hero always announced the use of their powers (eg, Superman saying, "My invulnerable body can withstand those bombs," instead of more natural speak, like, "Those bombs can't hurt me"😉. I used to think that's how superhero comics were all written...until I discovered Silver Age Marvel.
Personally I love the wacky Pre-Crisis stuff, it's just so silly it's awesome
DC writing has gotten much better since.
Originally posted by pym-ftw
They are two of the games they released at that time that are widely considered the worst games of all time, hell the aquaman game can be considered superman 64 2 because all it is is aquaman sprite over the superman one and the backround is much darker....
I never said DC didn't make bad games. They did. Superman 64 is arguably the worst game of the 90s. DC did have good games before and after it, though, just like Marvel had good games before and after some of their stinkers.
Originally posted by Newjak
The main difference between you and me is that for you it sounds like Gritty equals tough moral issues, I don't really see it that way.Just because Nolan went for a more 'realistic approach' and a more gritty approach does not in and of itself mean to me he produced a less safe movie especially now when those types of movies have become common place. Even more so when I think back to the Burton films who did 2 decades ago minus the realistic part at times.
And just because the Avengers didn't go super gritty does not mean they played it safe.
From there you and I can have varying degrees of how we felt each movie played it more or less safe than others. I might even agree with you overall that the Batman series may have played some things less safe, but that does not mean I believe the Avengers was this candyland sort of place like you.
great discussion here, guys. Curry brought up some great points. very interesting. Though i'm more incline to agree with NewJak(not to say curry's assessment is wrong because art is pretty subjective..on all level). Batman was definitely the more atmospheric film but i wouldn't translate that as being more complex than Avengers. Moral dilemma or character complexity is ultimately in the eye of those searching for it. We can easily parallel Nick Fury's dilemma to those expressed in ur argument for batman. I can pull out several dilemma from from Avengers and Tie-ins if i really wanted to but in the end it's still a matter of looking, if u know what i mean. For every "silly mindless action" one would pin on Avenger, there's always "pretentious, and unnecessarily brooding corniness" one can also say for Batman. Is it right? no lol. It's subjective. Both film are pretty damn fun to me though.
Originally posted by -Pr-not really. batman and superman games were notoriously sup-par, superman especially is labelled as "cursed". the arkham games are good, and you can throw in the yet to be released injustice one (pretty much based off of mk in a lot of ways), and the mmo, but what else is there?
Yeah, and they had good games before them, so it wasn't that it took them til this decade to make a good game.
both companies have a handful of decent games with their licenses so it's not really that great of a win for either.