Marvel & DC Make Misstep With "Whose Team" Campaigns

Marvel & DC Make Misstep With "Whose Team" Campaigns

We've all seen the ads and the tie-in merchandise. Join me in my disappointment in the juvenile advertising campaign for 'Batman v Superman' and 'Captain America: Civil War'

Editorial Opinion
By SkaarFace - Mar 08, 2016 09:03 AM EST
Batman vs Superman. Captain America vs Iron Man. Those are the themes of two of the most highly anticipated blockbusters of the 2016. But are they really?

As we know through the trailers for DC's 'Batman v Superman', the World's Finest will encounter each other at least twice in costumed fisticuffs and the end result will likely be both heroes acquiring one decisive win each and a likely third encounter will be interrupted by Doomsday showing up and Wonder Woman corralling the two icons into helping take down the immanent threat.

In Marvel Studios 'Captain America: Civil War' fans will see an loose adaptation of the Mark Millar's event from 2005 by the same name. This will see squads of heroes taking sides after the introduction of the Sokovia Accords. Cap will side against the Accords and Iron Man will be pro-Accords. This will likely see several encounters where both sides of the fight take a decided victory and send the others into retreat. After a couple of altercations, a larger-more imposing threat- will likely see both sides set aside their differences and work together to take down the big bad (likely Baron Zemo).

Now how we get to these points is the bigger story and one I cannot wait to see. But the advertising campaigns have taken to the general public as a more straight up mano-a-mano kind of movie. But we know-especially in the case of BvS- that the heroes will not be enemies the entire movie. This kind of crusade asking fans to take a side is a simple and childish way to get the general public excited for these movies in a "my dad could beat up your dad" kind of way.

I have no real alternative ideas for this sort of advertising. However, I do feel insulted and annoyed by the studios attempts to get me to choose a "side" for their movies.

If that were the case, I'd have to argue in the case of 'Civil War', it's a Captain America movie. So obviously Cap is in the right. He's the main character. He is the one the audience is supposed to resonate with throughout the movie. So asking me who I am rooting for in this movie should answer itself by the fact that I'm there to see a Captain America movie.

'Batman v Superman' is a slightly grayer area. On one hand, you have Batman: DC's cash cow. Throw Batman into something and you're pretty much guaranteeing a $400 million box office smash. Even the most reviled Batman movies have made substantial profits and DC has put a lot of effort to ensure that fans will be at this movie by adapting this Batman-and parts of the BvS story- to resemble Frank Miller's elder Batman from his critically acclaimed 'The Dark Knight Returns'. However, from what's been divulged about this new Batman (or Batfleck) is that he is much more brutal and seems to revel in the pain he inflicts on his victims. While his secret identity of Bruce Wayne appears to be acting out on his playboy persona, drinking excessively and enjoying the company of many women.

On the other hand you have Henry Cavil and Zack Snyder's Superman. A newish ("newish" because by the time BvS hits theaters, we can assume he's been Superman-ing for about three years in the DCEU timeline) Supes who helped decimate Metropolis while trying to save the Earth from General Zod and his minions. He's a divisive symbol who is trying to do good. But many- fans and citizens within the fictional universe- don't trust him due to his actions during Zod's attack. In a perfect world, Superman represents a symbol for what humanity can achieve if they put their differences aside and worked together for a better world. But that message was lost among the destruction and neck snapping Supey did in 2013's 'Man of Steel'.

The point being, neither big screen hero seems to be one to "root" for. In this election, I choose the write-in option and pick Wonder Woman. Gal Gadot's on-screen Amazon looks wonderful in costume and seems to be more than capable of handling herself.

Overall, these campaigns aren't going to take away from the enjoyment of their respective movies. But the idea of "choosing a side" seems to be taking away from the enjoyment of the experience. If I were to choose team Iron Man, I will probably be disappointed in the lack of screen time that side gets throughout the movie. The same could be said for 'Batman v Superman' which has been stated to focus much more heavily on introducing and building Batman/Bruce Wayne over Superman/Clark Kent. My takeaway from these advertising spectacles is to just ignore them and enjoy the movies for what the experience offers and not what the commercials are trying to get me to think.

How about you, dear reader? Are you taking sides? Why do you feel that the "Versus" campaign is successful? Or are you like me and feel like the idea is a bit juvenile? Feel free to comment.
SPIDER-MAN: Tom Holland Credits Robert Downey Jr. For Stopping His CIVIL WAR Scenes From Being Cut Down
Related:

SPIDER-MAN: Tom Holland Credits Robert Downey Jr. For Stopping His CIVIL WAR Scenes From Being Cut Down

CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR And TFATWS Actor Daniel Brühl Is Very Confident Zemo Will Return To The MCU
Recommended For You:

CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR And TFATWS Actor Daniel Brühl Is "Very Confident" Zemo Will Return To The MCU

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

WYLEEJAY
WYLEEJAY - 3/8/2016, 11:48 AM
I think the movies will actually be quite different. BvsS is an introduction to the world of the Justice League. Where Civil War may very well tear down the world of the Avengers by time it's over. The advertising is just another way to keep people talking about it. It works. See, you wrote this article. Lol. But I can see your point of view.
SkaarFace
SkaarFace - 3/8/2016, 1:56 PM
@WYLEEJAY - As far as overall content, I have no doubt both movies will be different. And you make a great point about how BvS is a world building movie and obviously Civil War is something very different, possibly destructive (in a good way) to the universe.
kong
kong - 3/9/2016, 6:09 AM
Even if they team up at the end or in the next movie, a good portion of both movies will be about their conflict. If they advertised Batman v. Superman as them teaming up not only would idiotic fanboys claim they spoiled the entire movie, but the audience would be confused and misled when the two heroes fight, and it would probably make less money.
SkaarFace
SkaarFace - 3/14/2016, 11:17 AM
@Kong - That's kind of where I feel that the movie should have been called "World's Finest" or anything that implies a versus movie like "Batman v Superman" does.

Civil War is a little different. It does have the possibility of being an entire movie based on hero vs hero. But with the inclusion of Baron Zemo, I'm inclined to think there will be a team up at the end of the movie. But Civil War's trailers have been less revealing than BvS.
View Recorder