>>68882432
I thought this was Avengers 2?

Avengers is such a shit fucking movie franchise.

It's already difficult enough to make a good capeshit movie even when you can focus entirely on one character. Who thought that shoving in like a dozen different heroes into one movie would ever be a good idea? Both films are absolute clusterfucks and frankly their tie in movies are shit as well aside from the tolerable Captain America films.

>>68882532
Shhh, dont tell people or they will come to post box office records

I think overall both DC and Marvel are complete opposite extremes. DC risked too much with an extremely dark and gritty BvS and was terribly received. Marvel risks nothing and gets money and good reviews, at the cost of making their movies forgettable light action comedies. I think the X-men are a cool compromise between dark and fun.

>>68882532
>tolerable Captain America films.

They suck, though.

>>68882674
They're tolerable. As in I actually watched them in their entirety rather than turning them off half way through like I did with all of the other ones (aside from Iron Man 1, which I also watched all the way through but only barely).

I'd certainly never call them good by any means.

>>68882432
pls explain

>>68882632
I agreed with you completely right up until the Xmen bit. Xmen is a mess at the moment, you were right if we were currently at the X2 period.

I'm saying this as someone who is really enjoying the way DC is taking superman/batman. I like it, but I can understand why it's not making millions. When you try something different, you often loose your original audience.

>>68882821
I think DoFP is the perfect balance between action, drama some small comedy and without having it extremely grim or extremely quippy.

File: merchant-628x356[1].png (118 KB, 628x356) Image search: [Google]

118 KB, 628x356

>>68882432
DELETE THIS

x men has been shit since jlaw fuck these other guys

>>68882432
I don't think the AoU score made 3 billion.

>>68882632
>DC risked too much with an extremely dark and gritty BvS and was terribly received. Marvel risks nothing and gets money and good reviews, at the cost of making their movies forgettable light action comedies.

Another way to look at it is WB bet big on big IPs, while Marvel bet big on smaller IPs. Marvel took risks, Favreau was one, Downey was another one for instance at the time. However overall Warner took a much bigger risk, as a failed Batman movie brings a much more brand damaging potential than a failed Iron Man movie.
Marvel was smart and somewhat lucky, WB not so much.

Also the track record of WB has been very underwhelming in recent times. Pan, Heart of the sea, Jupiter Ascending and a few others have been catastrophic business wise. WB is slowly becoming Sony Pictures v2.0, and after the BvS fiasco confidence in their business has been greatly shaken.
In the meantime Marvel Studios kept betting on smaller IPs with astounding success.

>>68882432
You mean producers skimming off the top or something?

>>68882432
They didn't get away with it though.
It's widely regarded as a mediocre and disappointing sequel.
They pretty much let Joss Whedon go because of it which was a great move on their part.

>>68884158
Fuck Joss Whedon, hate that faggot.