I don't really feel this was a problem per se. I almost feel like writing an article on this if I knew where to send it.
Marvel and DC'S Business Model were different because they were in different situations, not because one model is better or worse.
Marvel in 2008 had sold off their A listers, they couldn't use the X Men or Spiderman, so they had to build up from their lower tier characters. Because they weren't quite so widely known, they had to build them up in isolation. Black Widow and Hawkeye are also debuted in higher profile character's movies, as is Spiderman when they get him back, so it's not like debuting characters in other movies so they get exposure is so alien to Marvel's way of thinking.
Hulk had brand recognition from his TV show and earlier movie, Thor is a name people recognise even if they don't know Marvel Thor, Cap was just 'the guy that punched Hitler in the face on that one cover'. They were mostly unknown to the wider public, so it had to be established who and what they were up to before the Avengers movie.
Superman and Batman are far more widely known. Superman needed an intro to establish his differences from Christopher Reeve, but if there's one character that needs no introduction, it's the goddamned Batman. All the audience already knows who he is, and even the brief precredits Origin in BVS got flack for retreading old ground.
Because they already have high profile superheroes in Bats and Supes, there's scope for using that profile to give exposure to other characters. Wondy is not so high profile, and comes with some baggage, so rather than begin with a solo movie that might not draw in people that don't already know about her. And BVS sold Wondy brilliantly, her costume was gladiatorial rather than a swimsuit, that little grin showing off her attitude to battle, and so on. Wondy's subsequent success owes a lot to her previous exposure in BVS.
Meanwhile, they also tease a few lower level characters, which somehow gets flack for being appropriately written into the story instead of being a post credit sequence. Aquaman is shown off in all his glory in his limited screentime, showing his powerful warrior nature to counter those jokes about him being just a guy that can talk to fish. Boom, people that wouldn't have gone to an Aquaman solo movie are now interested in him.
Flash and Cyborg also get established briefly, enough to get an idea of who they are without saying too much.
By the time Justice League rolls around, the Trinity are all showcased at length, leaving room for the other three to be developed in this movie to build anticipation for subsequent solo films. Unfotunately, JL's production is extremely troubled and it doesn't quite deliver, but that's more due to a run of extreme bad luck than a flaw in the business model.
They're different situations, not a question of good or bad policies.
If there's one thing you can't blame Snyder for, it's a too short runtime. He always ends up with long director's cuts, and given the amount of missing scenes from the trailers, I think it's fair to assume Whedon is more the problem than the solution here.
Also, I'm pretty sure he's responsible for the various shots centred on Gal Gadot's ass.
'I bought the bank' is still bothering me, for a new reason now. Bruce is rich and takes care of his friends, but he's not stupid. He's not going to spend billions buying a bank when he can achieve the same result by just buying the loan or the farm itself for far less. It's a small family farm in Kansas (probably nearly paid off) it's not going to be harder to get hold of than an entire bank's balance sheet.
Edit: Sigh...This is one of those movies where I'm going to have to keep away from the fandoms for a while isn't it?
In deference to Claymore I should specify that this isn't a Marvel v DC thing. I enjoy both properties, and the silly turf war stuff is making the fandoms more poisonous than they need to be, it's the most needlessly vitriolic conversation since the Star Wars prequels. There's no reason they can't both succeed.
Cap et al were not nobodies, but they didn't have anywhere near the same brand recognition as Batman/Superman. Which means less immediate success, but also you don't have the same level of 'That's not my Superman/Batman' from the fanbase.
So the Batman and Superman introductions get a lot more immediate interest, but also a lot more flack for getting their characters 'wrong'.
If your specific complaint is that there wasn't enough time spent on the newcomers, it is relevant that much of the work that actually was done on their stories was cut out, that's evident just from watching the trailers (I didn't, in advance of watching the film, looking back, wow, who thought). It's not some fundamental rule of storytelling that they have to do the solo movies first.replacing 'I'll take that as a yes' with 'dying feels itchy' was a good idea
Justice League was not a problem because it was rushed into, it had problems because of a ridiculously troubled production where the first director had to step aside, the replacement director was immediately hit by three separate scandals, the stupid moustache controversy, and Ben Affleck got into some kind of trouble too I think?
It also doesn't seem like Joss had much respect for his predecessor's vision, while normally the Steppenwolf tweet thing wouldn't be worth comment, in these circumstances it looks like a direct jab at his predecessor. As soon as he started work, he seems to have fired the composer. So you get clashing directing styles and possibly actual malice.
Also, Danny Elfman using his own 1989 theme while mostly ignoring this franchises established themes is looking kind of like a deliberate snub to me. Granted, he was working in a hurry.
JL had far more problems than a lack of solo movies, and saying 'this is because they didn't build the universe first' is overlooking a host of other things that went wrong to the point that we're lucky we got a movie at all.
RE: BVS, if that's how you saw it, fair enough. I do think a lot of the problems were subverted expectations rather than being objectively bad, though. The vision gives weight to Bruce's paranoia, it's not solely there as a reference. The videos spur Wonderwoman to join the fight.
TL,DR: I blame the cut scenes, not the lack of solo movies.
I think we largely agree past each other on the issue, really.
All I can contribute is this: the fact there's even a debate to be had about whether Marvel or DC's cinematic universe has done this or that as well as the other is a great problem to have -- hard to imagine 10 years ago, maybe impossible to imagine 15 years ago.
All I can contribute is this: the fact there's even a debate to be had about whether Marvel or DC's cinematic universe has done this or that as well as the other is a great problem to have -- hard to imagine 10 years ago, maybe impossible to imagine 15 years ago.
True, it's been a great couple of years. Ideally, though we could stop crossing the streams so much. They're honestly hard to compare accurately. What's the benchmark? Marvel Phase 1s? Their current competitor, which have far more buildup to work with? Some imaginary spot in between? It's hard.