Inarguably, the cinema sector today is run by comic book movies with big budgets. Five of the Top 10 grossing movies of history are comic book movies produced by Marvel Studios. In my opinion, the reason for this is simple. All Marvel movies follow the same pattern which is a simple narrative adapted from a well known comic book, highest quality of visual effects in the market and a great cast to play the beloved comic book superheroes. Now, I am not here to say "Marvel is not cinema" like Scorsese but I just want to say that what Marvel is doing is not sustainable.

 

While there is nothing wrong with using the same formula over and over again (some may say it is a big success to keep the audience engaged for more than 10 years despite using the same formula and I would agree with this claim) the profit this formula provides for the studio is questionable. I know, Avengers: Endgame is the highest-grossing movie ever and it holds the record for the biggest profit made by a movie but that is an unfair comparison since it also holds the record for the highest budget for a movie. But what is the alternative of Marvel? You guessed it right: DC.

 

Look I am saying DC, not DC Extended Universe (DC Cinematic Universe). When compared, MCU is a lot better than DCEU with organized build-ups that led to climatic movies in the extended narrative and properly divided phases. Think about it, it took MCU 5 movies (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2 and Thor) to reach its first climax (The Avengers) while it only took 1 movie for DCEU (Man of Steel to Batman v Superman Dawn of Justice). Certainly, the DCEU has failed. However, it is not because of the content in their comic books is inferior to Marvel's, it is because they tried to adapt the Marvel formula to their material. They thought they could profit like Marvel easily if they used "The Marvel Way" but things did not turn out like that. Their biggest movies Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and The Justice League (obviously inspired by Civil War and The Avengers movies) just barely created a profit margin for them.

 

The alternative I am presenting is not DCEU. DCEU is just Warner Bros' unnecessary effort to copy Marvel Studios and hope to profit the same way they do. The alternative of the "Marvel Way" is actually DC but not DCEU. The material of DC Comics is darker, raises more moral ambiguities and provides more detailed characterization both for the heroes and for the villains compared to the Marvel Comics. After all, we are talking about the company that created "Watchmen"-the greatest graphic novel of all time. Therefore, if you try to create a movie following a very simple narrative as Marvel's, it kills the quality of content in the comics.

 

Fortunately, there are DC movies that create their own way. Nolan's "The Dark Knight Trilogy" the visionary "V for Vendetta" and Snyder's cult movie "Watchmen" are the perfect examples of what DC can accomplish when they decide to use the material their comic books provide properly. These movies are not only great comic book movies but also they are examples of 21st century's cinematic classics which grossed very well in the box office. Would Scorsese say The Dark Knight is not cinema? I doubt it.

 

Luckily, this year we saw the latest example of what DC can accomplish: "The Joker". Todd Philipps' (surprisingly the same person who directed the Hangover Trilogy) Joker is the perfect combination of the popular culture value of comic books (demonstrated by the 900+ million dollars of box office income) and the art of cinema (demonstrated by the Golden Lion award it received in the Venice Film Festival.) What makes Philips' Joker even more important than the aforementioned DC movies is its importance in the cinema sector is not limited with prooving DC's potential. In my opinion, The Joker is the first movie to present a better alternative to the "Marvel Way". The other DC movies also had cinematic quality (maybe even more than Joker) in them but still, they had budgets comparable to the Marvel movies. So, until now they were two different ways of making comic book movies that were almost equally profitable. But Joker has done something even better by reaching a Marvel level profit with a far more modest production-slightly over 50 million dollars. In nearly one month it grossed 950 million dollars. It is estimated that the box office gross will exceed 1 billion dollars in a couple of weeks making "The Joker" one of the highest profiting movies.

 

To be fair there is still an enormous gap between Endgame and The Joker's profit with the difference being approximately 1.5 billion. However, given that Endgame is the peak of a 10-year long build-up that led to an amazing marketing strategy for the movie; comparing "The Joker" to the MCU as a whole is a fairer comparison. The numbers say the average profit of a Marvel movie is 650 million dollars while "The Joker" profited nearly 1 billion on its own.

 

So why studios should be encouraging movies like "The Joker" more? Two simple answers: They are far more affordable risks and they are far more sustainable. The reason for the first answer is obvious so I am skipping that. But at some point, we know that Marvel is going to run out of ideas. Honestly for how long can they keep their audiences engaged by using the same formula for their movies. Even with the best marketing team, it will be no longer than 10 more years. DC, on the other hand, is about to build a more sustainable system by using the original ideas of different directors every time while Marvel's creativity only depends on the Russo brothers. Think about it Nolan's non-linear narrative style in "The Dark Knight Trilogy", Philipps' Fincheresque setup in "The Joker" and Snyder's nearly absurd tone in "Watchmen" all provided different approaches to the beloved characters of DC comics. This system can go on and on as long as new directors with new ideas continue to emerge. However, Marvel's cycle will be ending as soon as the Russo brothers run out of ideas.