Suicide Squad

Bane?

Those are the budgets Marlel claimed. The only one that there is public proof they lied about is Guardians, which costed almost 250 million.

SS > MCu
i love it

Nobody knows the advertising budgets for all of them.

>EVERYDAY TILL YOU LIKE IT
This is retarded when MCUfag do it, it's retarded when DCEUfags do it

>Guardians
>773 mil (with china)
>Chinese gross: 93 million

>SS
>720 mil (no China)

Reminder that Marvel is literally the Bayformers of Superhero movies.

fuck, SS would have killed it in china.

Guardians cost $232.3 million but Disney received a rebate of $36.4 million. The net budget, then, was $195.9 million, which isn't much more than the estimated budget of $170 million.

Which, by the by, was only ever an estimate, not a statement of fact. So it wasn't a lie. Try harder neck time, DCuck.

Yeah, well, whatever works. Marvel has a number of movies with huge audience and critical acclaim under their belt; none of the DCEU can make the same claim.

We don't know if any other movie recieved rebates and shit. The fact of the matter is that Disney lied about their budget to make their movie seem more successful than it was, while actual human beings (IE, not Chinkshitters) want to watch DC movies.

WB lied about the BvS budget and is lying about the SS budget.

Just like every single studio that launches a succesful blockbuster.

The difference is that there is proof Guardians was lied about, while the others are just your salt and tinfoil hat talking

Yeah, that doesn't make sense. Bane is a Marvel character.

>but Disney received a rebate of $36.4 million

Sure thing buddy

Stop skewing the numbers fuckstick

>marlelet falseflagging

Back to Cred Forums

How are those numbers skewed?

Yeah studio lie about their budget, they usually INFLATE the numbers in order to pay less to cofinancers and the taxman. When a movie goes overbudget is because someone is fucking up badly

Wow I guess a lot of people really hate that horrible scene, huh?

>image.jpg

I want mobile posters to leave.

Studios have been lowballing budgets for a while now. The spec game has changed.

>The fact of the matter is that Disney lied

They didn't lie. They stated the estimated budget of $170 million before/during shooting, then later stated what the budget ended up being after release.

Making an estimate and then being wrong about said estimate isn't lying, user. Quite the contrary, Disney (and every movie studio) has a vested fiscal interest in keeping its movies' budgets as small as is reasonable for what they're trying to achieve, right? Why would they intentionally lie about the budget?

Also, .

Finally, regardless of the budget, it doesn't change the fact that Marvel has a number of movies under its belt that received widespread audience and critical acclaim, whereas the DCEU has only managed middling audience responses and atrocious critical ones.

Just to head off a dumb shit argument, by the by, even if you buy into the frankly sad and absurd theory that Marvel/Disney buys off critics, that doesn't have any effect on audience response, which is still higher for Marvel movies than DC ones.

Dude, that was in the damn news.

google.com/#q=guardians of the galaxy budget

But Suicide Squad was a massive hit, and the threw DCEU movies made more than the first the Marlel movies?????

Not my fault the SJW critics were so triggered by SS.

>2016
>only counting the domestic gross.

You sound like a fat American.

>$170

$232.3 million (gross)[2]
$195.9 million (net)[2]

kill you are self

I always like how nobody counts the Dark Knight trilogy or any of the older DC movies in this. Marvelcucks really want to push the narrative that Marlel invented superheroes.

DELETE THIS

I'M IN CHARGE HERE

...

These threads need to be banned, there's no more pride in SS doing well than there is in Hot Topic shirts selling.

The movie was carried entirely by the "Harley XD" fanbase to the point that she'll be getting her own standalone film, and she was objectively the worst part of the movie after the forced quips, poor editing, bad action, boring plot, awful third act, and pop music.

What I'm saying is that SS's success might turn the DCEU into an even worse MCU, and that's nothing to celebrate. Not that this matters because I'll inevitably get "HURR MUH CONSOLE WARS" as a response, but it's worth a shot.

There's no relation between the films' universes, you may as well try to count Blade in the MCU if you're that autistic.

So, are you retarded, or...?

Protip: read the thread first before responding and looking like a moron.

Do you feel in charge?

...

Bane?!

SS > mcu

>What I'm saying is that SS's success might turn the DCEU into an even worse MCU
But you didn't join us in the sun when you had the chance.
Don't cry now.

The Dark Knight trilogy isn't part of the DC Extended Universe. That explicitly begins with Man of Steel.

But, please, argue that it should be included. I'd rather like to include the McGuire and Garfield Spider-Man movies, personally, if we're gonna talk about total grosses.

The difference is that Fant4stic and Blade weren't made by Marvel, while TDK was made by DC's parent company.

There had never been a good Marvel movie before the MCU (and most of them are horrible too)

>Sony is Marvel
????????????????????????

Daily reminder that TDK and TDKR are contemporaries of the MCU.
For a time they were DC's competitor to it.
And they won.

I'VE PAID YOU A VERY LARGE FORTUNE

>What is Spider-Man 1 and 2, X2, X-Men: First Class and Days of Future Past

Not mad by Marvel studios.

His point is that TDK was by the same studio as the DCEU.

Older good Marvel movies were not made by Marvel Studios.

Not made by Marvel is what they are.

And much better than Marvel too.

I really dont get why people that like the MCU are so butthurt that the DCEU is doing better financially.

Right, let's be generous then.

DC, 2005 thru 2012 (7 years)
- Batman Begins: 374,200,000
- Superman Returns: 391,100,000
- The Dark Knight: 1,005,000,000
- Green Lantern: 220,000,000
- Dark Knight Rises: 1,085,000,000
- TOTAL: $3,075,300,000

MARVEL, 2005 thru 2012. Note that there are no entries for the first 3 years.
- Iron Man: 585,200,000
- The Incredible Hulk: 263,400,000
- Iron Man 2: 623,900,000
- Thor: 449,300,000
- Captain America: 370,600,000
- The Avengers: 1,520,000,000
- TOTAL: 3,812,400,000

It would appear that you would be fucking WRONG there, user. With three less years (but, granted, one more movie), Marvel managed to make more money than DC over the same period. You will note with interest, I hope, that over those same three years, Marvel made the highest grossing movie of the eleven total listed here, whereas DC made the lowest grossing.

But DC has the highest critical acclaim. The Dark Knight is the standard for what a good cape film is. It's the Citizen Kane of capes.

????
I was talking about TDK and TDKR. Specified that in my post, too.

Nice try though.

>Company Budget wars

user, I was extremely generous and gave you three extra movies, two of them unrelated, because TDK and DKR (which tell a single narrative) together do not make nearly as much money as the total of the MCU (again, which tells a single narrative) over the same period. The Dark Knight came out the same year as Iron Man.

While TDK and DKR individually make more than (most) MCU films in the same period, they don't make more than the total narrative and in fact fall notably short.

>But DC has the highest critical acclaim

Only just, and only back in 2008 with The Dark Knight (a 9.5/10 according to IMDB). DKR manages only an 8.5, which isn't that much better than The Avengers' own 8.1.

Marvel movies seem to generally hang around a 7-8 range, which might not be as good as one singular DC movie, but is still respectable overall. And DC has notably not been able to capture that magic again and in fact has languished these past few years, whereas Marvel has been consistent.

>avengers
>good reviews

If that's not a clear indicator of critics being bought out I don't know what is.

Fucking Ghostbusters was almost rated that highly, and we all know what a shitshow that was.

So when DC movies get good reviews it's because their Citizen Kane, but when Marvel movies do it's because they're buying out critics.

Uh-huh. That smells like a double standard.

>Guardians cost $232.3 million but Disney received a rebate of $36.4 million
Oh sweet I didn't know movies had mail-in rebates now. Why don't all movies do that then?

DCucks effortlessly BTFO.

Seriously though, how much money your favourite films made is not important if you really like them. Your enjoyment doesn't require validation in the eyes of others. Unless you're trying to convince yourself that you like these things out of company loyalty and desperate spite against a competitor that has no ills toward you and indeed does not think of you at all.

On that note, if there's anything you want to get off your chest, any time is a good time...

Kek idc about your meme logic the bottom line is DC has the highest critical acclaim and that movie is the standard for which cape movies strive for and always will be. Marvel movies are popcorn film flicks that will be forgotten over time. People will sill watch the Dark Knight decades from now.

>So when DC movies get good reviews

When does that happen?

Nah I'm just ribbing we all know Begins and TDK were good.

>inflation
>relevant

Disney fags fuck off

>On that note, if there's anything you want to get off your chest, any time is a good time...

BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE IS THE GREATEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME

From a Forbes article detailing it:

>The attraction of filming in Britain isn’t just a ready supply of skilled staff but also the government’s film tax credit scheme. It entitles movies with expenditure of more than $31.8 million (£20 million) to claim back up to 20% of their production costs.
>[...]
>To qualify for the rebate a movie must be considered British which requires meeting a number of criteria including 10% of its production cost being spent in Britain.

Basically to encourage spending money in Britain, the British offer studios a rebate on the money they spend there. So say you spend $100 million on a movie in Britain. Britain then gives you $20 million back, while it gets to keep the remaining $80 million.

I'm pretty sure most movies do stuff like this.

The bottom line is that DC has ONE movie with critical acclaim notably higher than its MCU contemporaries.

Quantity has a quality all on its own. Or put another way, what's better: one movie with a rating of 9, or five movies with a rating of 7?

>People will sill watch the Dark Knight decades from now.

People still watch Plan 9 From Outer Space. What's your point?

Mate, Avengers was extremely amatuerly made.

>one movie with a rating of 9, or five movies with a rating of 7?
One movie with a rating of 9.

Are you seriously arguing quantity over quality?

>what's better: one movie with a rating of 9, or five movies with a rating of 7?
How about a 10/10 movie despite the "critics" scores? Quality is all that really matters.

Rewatching this movie it's hard to figure out why normies went apeshit for this film.

It was the first time in live action movies that a bunch of superheroes from different movies all crossed over with each other. The novelty wears off after a second viewing.

>Are you seriously arguing quantity over quality?

Sort of, but it's more consistency over time: a series that can continuously deliver the same quality over and over again will last longer than series that has schizophrenic ups and downs.

Besides which, do you know how sad it is to keep pointing back at The Dark Knight as we get further and further away from 2008 - particularly since The Dark Knight isn't even in continuity with the DCEU? The DCEU can't live up to whatever standard The Dark Knight set any better than Marvel can. In fact they're doing worse at it.

But BvS is better than TDK.

...

Intriguing rebuttal.

It's the only one I could give. There are entire novels worth of material on the Internet about exactly how and why BvS is not better than TDK, how it may well even be the worst big-budget movie of all time. You know the arguments, and if you haven't been convinced by now, you never will be.

I'll just sit comfortably knowing that the weight of the consensus is far and away against you and always will be.

The point still standa DC has the best cape movie.

>knowing that the weight of the consensus is far and away against you and always will be.

>most people are intelligent
Demonstrably false.

This guy gets it.

>Yeah, well, whatever works. Marvel has a number of movies with huge audience and critical acclaim under their belt; none of the DCEU can make the same claim.

But this thread is literally about how Suicide Squad has a bigger audience than most marvel movies?

source

SS was fine man, literally just as good as any MCU movie and with much stronger characters.

But that it has a schizophrenic overall record. It made Batman Begins AND Superman Returns (though I'm going to take this moment to note I'm talking strictly about critics right here - Returns is actually my favorite Superman movie). It has Dark Knight AND Green Lantern. You don't get to pick and choose where it's convenient.

Marvel's MCU might not have the "best" movie, but it's been consistent in its deliveries. DC is like some artsy restaurant that ONCE produced a steak so good you had an orgasm, but also once gave you a steak you swear was made out of actual cow shit.

Whereas Marvel is like an Applebees or Unos or TGI Friday's or whatever down the street from you that's been there since you were 10. It's not the best food, but it's certainly good enough, it's familiar, and it's always there when you need it, and best of all when you go to some other state and find the same restaurant you can be reasonably certain that the quality of food is gonna be exactly the same as your familiar one back home.

You tried

>There are entire novels worth of material on the Internet about exactly how and why BvS is not better than TDK

source?

>I'll just sit comfortably knowing that the weight of the consensus is far and away against you and always will be.

Well obviously not if you feel the need to post about it. Sorry people liking movies triggers you so much.

great rebuttal, totally made me change my mind

Why are MCU fans so defensive if anyone disagrees with them?

That still doesnt change the fact that DC has the best cape movie and is the one critics and people will always point to for what a cape movie should be.

whenever I see a d.c.ucc trying to defend this movie I feel warm inside. Yall know in your hearts this is a shitty movie and so was bvs. Marvel is king and that hurts you on the inside

They had one good movie back in 2008, and no one even talks about that movie anymore unless it's Baneposting.

marvels like the chuck Norris of comic books lol

The only thing that matters is that marvel produces good movies while the dceu is shit.

>Looks number of posters.
>Looks at number of replies.
Good job, OP. God's work.