There tends to be three-sides. DC Comics fans, Marvel Comics fans, and then those who like both equally. And that is for comic books, movies, television shows, and video games. Marvel fans have been boasting and claiming victory due to the success of the Avengers and how many of the comic book genre films are from Marvel. They aren't wrong, but we are here to talk about how it doesn't really matter. Television shows are better than movies. It takes a moment to stop and really think about this. And then not all will see it this way.
Sure, there are a few things about films on the big screen that we rarely, if ever, see on the small screen. Bigger budgets, bigger explosions, and usually a stronger story. And of course there are downsides to television shows. Ratings can be a real pain because if they are low, a show is in trouble and could get cancelled. Key word is "could". With television, there is room to grow and/or improve. There is a chance to make corrections on the fly and finish the season strong. Most could look to Marvel's own in, "Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D.". The series started slightly weak, with even Marvel fans were asking "wtf". But, they turned things around and closed out the season with a really good run. With movies, the final cut is the final cut. If the film bombs, and has horrible reviews, it is less likely that there will be a follow-up film. Even a quick reboot isn't guaranteed to happen. Look at some of Marvel's early attempts on the big screen. Films like "Daredevil" and "Ghost Rider" didn't fare well at all. "Daredevil" is now about to rebooted, and "Ghost Rider" managed a sequel somehow, but failed again. DC Comics may have put out less films post-2000 (things were different before that with Marvel being barely existed and were poorly done in regards to movies), but they have less failures.
Another way that television is better than movies, is the wait time. Longest wait time in television is the "summer break". a few months of reruns before returning for weekly shows. Movies? Looking at a minimum 2 year wait time in between films. Sure there are exceptions, but not many. And although things are getting better, even today sequels and follow-ups tend to pale in comparison to its predecessor. That is a long time to wait for disappointment. Same thing could be said about TV shows, but again, able to improve on things most times.
Going with the wait time, is also the star power. Of course you will see bigger names in a movie. They get paid more in most cases. However, with films there is only a small amount of time to get both the story across and get characters into it. With comic book movies especially, there are countless characters everyone wants to see make an appearance, and even if there is say five characters that fit, it is another x-amount of time between films and even less space for new characters to appear in the next one. With television, you have an entire season with numerous shows to not only tell one larger story or a collection of smaller stories, but also more room for characters to appear. Example would be villains, with 1 or 2 in one film, then 1-2 more in the next, etc To show 5-10 villains would take 5 films and roughly ten years time. Not the case on TV, as even if they focused on a villain or two for an entire season, they can showcase the same amount of them in half the time than with movies. And not even guaranteed to get the star to reappear (ie. Bruce Banner is two different people in the "Avengers" movieverse...damn you yet thank you, Edward Norton).
Now I am sure someone is thinking about the "Phases" for building up "Avengers". But remember to stop and think about what that style is slightly imitating. Television. In a basic sense of course with each film being an episode leading up to a massive season finale. That being said, now we have "Arrow" and "The Flash" about to take things to another level on the small screen. Cross-overs between the two could make for some pure awesomeness.
Lastly, television is generally more affordable than the movies. Almost everyone has a television (almost), but not everyone goes to the movies. Especially in the age we live in where it is all digital and despite laws, easily accessible...for free.
Was hard writing this really, as I love both film and television. Perhaps it is just the DC Comics fan within that had to make a point about who is really "winning" this supposed battle between DC Comics and Marvel (I do like Marvel, just a preference for the originals right now). And even though I enjoyed "Green Lantern" it was really DC's only flop, and others being more top quality, are they really "losing"? Definitely owning the small screen with "Arrow" and new shows "The Flash", "Gotham", and "Constantine". If we add quality video games to the mix, DC Comics is beating Marvel two out of three formats. So, you can have your movies, Marvel....and keep up the good work as they are great to watch.
For more Comic Books, Movies, TV Shows, Video Games, and Wrestling stuff! Head over to Non-Geeky Nerd and check things out! Stay Nerdy!
Sure, there are a few things about films on the big screen that we rarely, if ever, see on the small screen. Bigger budgets, bigger explosions, and usually a stronger story. And of course there are downsides to television shows. Ratings can be a real pain because if they are low, a show is in trouble and could get cancelled. Key word is "could". With television, there is room to grow and/or improve. There is a chance to make corrections on the fly and finish the season strong. Most could look to Marvel's own in, "Marvel's Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D.". The series started slightly weak, with even Marvel fans were asking "wtf". But, they turned things around and closed out the season with a really good run. With movies, the final cut is the final cut. If the film bombs, and has horrible reviews, it is less likely that there will be a follow-up film. Even a quick reboot isn't guaranteed to happen. Look at some of Marvel's early attempts on the big screen. Films like "Daredevil" and "Ghost Rider" didn't fare well at all. "Daredevil" is now about to rebooted, and "Ghost Rider" managed a sequel somehow, but failed again. DC Comics may have put out less films post-2000 (things were different before that with Marvel being barely existed and were poorly done in regards to movies), but they have less failures.
Another way that television is better than movies, is the wait time. Longest wait time in television is the "summer break". a few months of reruns before returning for weekly shows. Movies? Looking at a minimum 2 year wait time in between films. Sure there are exceptions, but not many. And although things are getting better, even today sequels and follow-ups tend to pale in comparison to its predecessor. That is a long time to wait for disappointment. Same thing could be said about TV shows, but again, able to improve on things most times.
Going with the wait time, is also the star power. Of course you will see bigger names in a movie. They get paid more in most cases. However, with films there is only a small amount of time to get both the story across and get characters into it. With comic book movies especially, there are countless characters everyone wants to see make an appearance, and even if there is say five characters that fit, it is another x-amount of time between films and even less space for new characters to appear in the next one. With television, you have an entire season with numerous shows to not only tell one larger story or a collection of smaller stories, but also more room for characters to appear. Example would be villains, with 1 or 2 in one film, then 1-2 more in the next, etc To show 5-10 villains would take 5 films and roughly ten years time. Not the case on TV, as even if they focused on a villain or two for an entire season, they can showcase the same amount of them in half the time than with movies. And not even guaranteed to get the star to reappear (ie. Bruce Banner is two different people in the "Avengers" movieverse...damn you yet thank you, Edward Norton).
Now I am sure someone is thinking about the "Phases" for building up "Avengers". But remember to stop and think about what that style is slightly imitating. Television. In a basic sense of course with each film being an episode leading up to a massive season finale. That being said, now we have "Arrow" and "The Flash" about to take things to another level on the small screen. Cross-overs between the two could make for some pure awesomeness.
Lastly, television is generally more affordable than the movies. Almost everyone has a television (almost), but not everyone goes to the movies. Especially in the age we live in where it is all digital and despite laws, easily accessible...for free.
Was hard writing this really, as I love both film and television. Perhaps it is just the DC Comics fan within that had to make a point about who is really "winning" this supposed battle between DC Comics and Marvel (I do like Marvel, just a preference for the originals right now). And even though I enjoyed "Green Lantern" it was really DC's only flop, and others being more top quality, are they really "losing"? Definitely owning the small screen with "Arrow" and new shows "The Flash", "Gotham", and "Constantine". If we add quality video games to the mix, DC Comics is beating Marvel two out of three formats. So, you can have your movies, Marvel....and keep up the good work as they are great to watch.
For more Comic Books, Movies, TV Shows, Video Games, and Wrestling stuff! Head over to Non-Geeky Nerd and check things out! Stay Nerdy!
No comments:
Post a Comment