Here’s the thing I don’t get, is I see this question EVERYWHERE but I really can’t substantiate meaningfully. What exactly is “wrong” with the DC films? A lot of loud people are loudly criticizing them, and they’re not without mistakes, but a lot of the criticisms are either completely baseless or missing context.
They’re NOT box office flops. Anyway, compare the first films in both universes, Iron Man and Man of Steel, they did similar numbers domestically (318 and 291 respectively) but Man of Steel did a lot more internationally (585 and 668). When you account for the differences in budget, both films were similarly profitable in their theatrical runs, but MoS probably made a bit more when including endorsements and merchandise. Either way, totally NOT a flop
Similarly, people like to compare BvS to Avengers, but I don’t think that’s a reasonable comparison. First, Avengers was the first to do that, which gave it a novelty that chances are won’t be matched again any time soon, but also the most comparable film would be Justice League, which isn’t released yet. Should BvS have done better? I think so, and it probably would have done better if they’d done the extended cut rather than the theatrical one. But still, it’s only the SECOND film in their universe and it out-grossed the majority of Marvel films (all but Iron Man 3, Civil War, and the two Avenger films internationally) and was still massively profitable. IIRC, the final profit margin was somewhere north of $300M (after theater cut, P&A, etc.), but I don’t think that included Blu-Ray or digital sales (no direct source on this one).
Even Suicide Squad has done really well. It’s still in the theaters but it too is only out-grossed by one additional Marvel film, Guardians of the Galaxy, and it won’t catch that, but they’ve made a ton of money on it.
In short, no matter how you slice it, none of the films in the DCEU are box office flops.
And while I’m thinking about it: What about Spider-Man and X-Men? I’m not including non-MCU films because it just muddies the water. Every Spider-Man film until his appearance in Civil War was made by Sony and isn’t part of the MCU, and there were some good ones in there (IMO, Spider-Man 2 is among the best Superhero films ever) but there’s also some bad ones. And X-Men (along with Fantastic Four, and until the last few years Ghost Rider, Dare Devil, Elektra, etc.) are owned by Fox and, again, aren’t part of the MCU and there’s some really good and really bad films in there too. DC films are different because, unlike Marvel, Warner Bros. has the rights to ALL of their characters.
Another objection is that DC films are too dark. What does that even mean? Light and humorous films aren’t necessarily better, and dark isn’t necessarily bad. Just looking at Batman, Batman and Robin was easily the lightest and most humor oriented of the bunch, and The Dark Knight was probably the darkest, they the former is universaly considered the worst and the latter most often considered the best. IMO, anyone criticizing the TONE of the DCEU films is mis-attributing why they don’t like them. Sure, some people just never enjoy darker films, but that’s clearly not the case for anyone that had previously enjoyed the Nolan and Burton Batman films.
So why are they bad films? They’re not, that’s subjective. Yes, they’re not well received by the critics, but the fan response has been considerably better, though generally not as high as Marvel’s. Sure, plenty of people are bashing the films online, but these are the same ones that seem to act as though Marvel can do no wrong. Thing is, if you go back and look at Marvel’s phase one films, other than Iron Man, many of them weren’t initially as well received as people remember. For instance, not only was The Incredible Hulk not well received by fans, it actually likely lost some money and Iron Man 2, while profitable is often still maligned by many fans.
And, again, that’s not to say the DC isn’t without flaws. I think the biggest mistake they’ve made so far is the Theatrical cut of BvS, the ultimate edition was much better, though it still had some script issues. I also think that, perhaps, they’re going a little too deep into the comic book lore than they need to. As an example, I know a number of fans were confused by the Knightmare scenes, and for those unfamiliar with Darkseid, it’s hard to figure out what’s going on. Whereas most of the deep lore in the Marvel films has been in the form of Easter eggs, so they’re appreciated for those who get them but not harmful to understanding what’s going on for those that don’t.
Ultimately, I think the biggest problem is that DC has significant history in pop culture and many of those portrayals have been iconic to the point that they not only have to do what they’re doing now well, but they have to also win over fans who want more of that. The Dark Knight trilogy was able to avoid this because Batman was at a low point following the Schumacher abominations, so no one was pleading for that campy version back.
Consider that one of the main complaints about Man of Steel and BvS about Superman was that “this isn’t MY Superman”. I full-heartedly agree, and I LOVED the Christopher Reeve Superman growing up, this is a different version that’s not only a bit more grounded but updated to our time. Though I love those films, the original 1978 film is campy as hell and would be laughed out of the theater if it were made today, and I don’t mean the effects, the representations. Similar things have been said about all of the characters that have other iconic versions, notably Lex. If he’d been the exact same character with a different name, he probably still wouldn’t be liked, but he’d at worst been a forgotten no-name villain. But what characters have been well received? The ones we haven’t see before but people have been really eager to see, Wonder Woman (we saw her on TV and that was 40 years ago), Harley, Dead Shot, Amanda Waller (we saw her in Green Lantern, but no one cared about that version).
And then look at how this is a MASSIVE advantage to how Marvel characters are received. Before the film, Iron Man was NOT a household name the way Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man are. There were no previous versions to compare him to. His film was really well executed, but there’s no one wishing we had a different version. People were familiar with Captain America, but most people saw him as a campy, super-patriotic joke. The only character that had an iconic version previously was Hulk and, like Wonder Woman, that was at that time 30 years earlier and the previous movie was poorly received. In fact, I think part of the irony here will be that these versions are now all SO iconic that when they do eventually have to recast or reboot the characters, people will be bitching and moaning that they liked the RDJ and Chris Evans versions better.
Anyway, I guess TLDR is just give DC a chance. They’re 3 films in the DCEU, they’re still getting their footing, and they’ve made it clear that they’re listening to the fan criticism about what they did and didn’t like about BvS and Suicide Squad. Wonder Woman has some of those criticisms (though it’d already been in production for some time before BvS came out) but I think the real proof will be with Justice League. It’s at that point we can meaningfully compare that to Avengers and how well or how poorly they’ve course corrected. Personally, I’m optimistic. Even people I know who didn’t particularly care for BvS or Suicide Squad seem fairly optimistic about their upcoming movies. Time will tell.