DC Live-Action TV and Film General News and Discussion Thread

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by GDB

I'm not sure how you can argue "fun and enjoyable" is Aquaman's thing but not Shazam's, when you can look at review sites like rotten tomatoes and see that Shazam is preferred by both fans and critics.

It kind of feels like your justification is that money is all that matters for whether a movie is good or not. Sure, it's what matters to executives to determine if it was successful or not, but it doesn't necessarily determine if a movie is good or not.

Also: most people don't know if a movie is "fun and enjoyable" before going to go see it. Not unless it's one of the rare movies that gets a long run of highly profitable weeks at the theatres, and that's extremely rare. Most drop off HARD after the opening weekend.

I'm throwing facts at you about why WB execs didn't make Shazam as the flagship of his own cinematic universe, and it made sense from financial perspective. I never argue about the narrative quality.

Was Shazam movie good? Yeah. Was is profitable enough for a sequel? Yeah. Was it "Cinematic Universe Starter"-good? Financially speaking, hell naw!

And the box office list that I gave you is the overall amount. So, your "opening weekend" argument is moot.

[Tactics]

Originally Posted by GDB

I'm not sure how you can argue "fun and enjoyable" is Aquaman's thing but not Shazam's, when you can look at review sites like rotten tomatoes and see that Shazam is preferred by both fans and critics.

It kind of feels like your justification is that money is all that matters for whether a movie is good or not. Sure, it's what matters to executives to determine if it was successful or not, but it doesn't necessarily determine if a movie is good or not.

Also: most people don't know if a movie is "fun and enjoyable" before going to go see it. Not unless it's one of the rare movies that gets a long run of highly profitable weeks at the theatres, and that's extremely rare. Most drop off HARD after the opening weekend.

Fun and enjoyable is not enough to see if one is capable as cinematic universe starter.
Realistically, Disney won't even think of getting Marvel into their collection if Iron Man alone not showing great revenue potential; I think the fact that Iron Man toys got significant boost after movies and still running strong even after Stark death in Endgame speaks enough. Fans and critics only enough to warrant either prequel or sequel, when it comes to cinematic universe money speaks louder than general reception as its hard to deny the initiator have to score high enough to carry heroes (or monsters in Kaiju universe series) that will follow.

By now, only Joker (Joaquin) and Aquaman have the power to ignited cinematic universe as both not only successful financially but also open and have strong presence.
Batman (Pattinson) director already said they will contain the story on Batman's first year dealing with Gotham, which lead to plan of having Penguin mini-series; Joker in prison is because he's Batman last "thug boss" (that fell into dangerous chemical, thus his skin condition and familiarity with Batman compare to policemen throughout movies) before "supervillain" Riddler.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

I'm throwing facts at you about why WB execs didn't make Shazam as the flagship of his own cinematic universe, and it made sense from financial perspective. I never argue about the narrative quality.

Was Shazam movie good? Yeah. Was is profitable enough for a sequel? Yeah. Was it "Cinematic Universe Starter"-good? Financially speaking, hell naw!

Normally I'd agree. I'm saying for DC specifically, who has failed multiple times to launch their cinematic universe and continues to cede the super hero movie market share to Marvel, needs to take a step back, slow down, lower expectations, and go with the well received option on the table instead of continuing to throw darts at the wall and hoping one will stick.

And the box office list that I gave you is the overall amount. So, your "opening weekend" argument is moot.

While Aquaman appears to be an outlier for opening weekend vs overall (looking it up, 70m to 331m domestic, can't find international opening weekend numbers though that's a huge international percentage), just posting an overall number literally proves nothing.

Originally Posted by Tactics

Batman (Pattinson) director already said they will contain the story on Batman's first year dealing with Gotham

The movie itself said it was his second or third year.

[Tactics]

Originally Posted by GDB

The movie itself said it was his second or third year.

Batman said in early part of movies he just get enough reputation to scare thugs, he's not in level that capable to scare corrupted politician, mafia, let alone supervillain.
Person he helped scared of him as well rather than be grateful. Every police that's not Gordon multiple times addressing him as masked vigilante or simply "You!" compare to Bale's or Keaton's; after the film is going to be the first year of him establishing trust and fame as caped crusader, that's what the director meant; he's not "Gotham Hero" until end of The Batman.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by GDB

While Aquaman appears to be an outlier for opening weekend vs overall (looking it up, 70m to 331m domestic, can't find international opening weekend numbers though that's a huge international percentage), just posting an overall number literally proves nothing.

Overall BO number & profit is literally the major factor whether studio execs will follow through with a cinematic universe or not. They don't care about opening weekend as much as they care about popularity, box office legs & total revenue from the movie in question.

Popular example: Universal had been trying repeatedly to build the "Dark Universe" with The Wolfman (2010), Dracula Untold (2014) & The Mummy (2017) only to fail every single time precisely because all of them are mediocre movies financially and not that popular with audiences. They finally learnt their lesson & stopped (for now) after the much maligned & memed The Mummy.

Again, financial factor & popularity are two important elements for a Cinematic Universe Starter. You can not pitch a "lukewarm" movie as a tentpole CU-starter to studio investors & stock-holders. MCU, Monsterverse & The Conjuring Universe were not built on movies with thin profit margin like Shazam.

"It's not “show friends.” It's show business" - Bob Sugar (Jerry Maguire)

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

Overall BO number & profit is literally the major factor whether studio execs will follow through with a cinematic universe or not. They don't care about opening weekend as much as they care about popularity, box office legs & total revenue from the movie in question.

You're clearly not actually arguing based on the original premise, which is what DC should do, and insist on arguing only on what they are likely or will do, so this discussion is over.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by GDB

You're clearly not actually arguing based on the original premise, which is what DC should do, and insist on arguing only on what they are likely or will do, so this discussion is over.

The problem with your entire argument of "Making Shazam a Cinematic Universe Starter" is that you have little consideration (if at all) for profit (read the Jerry Maguire quote above). Movie industry is not charity. CU-starter movie need to make an exceptional amount of money for the company execs to greenlit because they have investors to please. That's how the industry works. We already have a failed CU example courtesy of Universal Pictures. No sane company would want to follow their footsteps. If you live in an alternate universe where Shazam made 560+ Mill with 100 Mill budget then your argument would sound more reasonable, but not in our current reality.

Also, when it comes to DC movies, DC Comics themselves really have no power to decide anything. All decisions are made by WB execs. They might employ some consultants from DC Comics but it's all going back to execs like Kevin Tsujihara, Ann Sarnoff, Jason Kilar, etc. during the old DCEU before Discovery took over WB.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

YouTube

https://youtu.be/DvCFc5JtkkA

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

YouTube

https://youtu.be/ZwFOa3qV5Sk

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

This is actually the DC project that gets the most interest outta me:

YouTube

https://youtu.be/83ClbRPRDXU

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

Especially when the author himself breaks down the trailer:

YouTube

https://youtu.be/3e54llvV_tc

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[Kanon]

It looks fantastic visually, at least. I read the comics many years ago but don't remember much.

[MeoTwister5]

There were big rumors that Caville was supposed to appear in SDCC to help reinvigorate DC and quell rumors that he had left his position as Superman. He didn't show, and now there are rumors that he was supposed to be there but got COVID.

Whatever the truth is I feel bad for the really dedicated DCCU fanbase. WBs presentation kinda paled in comparison to the Marvel reveals despite the phasing being confusing as fuck. Personally I'm interested in Black Adam and Sandman.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

WB-Discovery plan on how they'll handle DC properties going forward after the big merger:

YouTube

https://youtu.be/zAB1VaFWU1U

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

I'd say the current regime have more business sense than the previous one. But whether or not they'll succeed is anyone's guess. The people will judge & decide whether the next batch of DC movies will be blockbusters or not.

[Kanon]

Finished watching The Sandman. There were two brilliant episodes, but all the other ones ranged from meh to plain boring. It made me remember I didn't like the comics much, so count me out for a second season. They did a pretty good job hyping it up with the final scene though, but I just know they'll find a way to make it boring. Not to mention Lucifer was horribly miscast.

[Wandering Soul]

So another CW superhero show has come to an end with Stargirl. It's too bad it was canceled but they wrapped up everything as best as they could and even gave some closure with some flash forwards. I guess one good thing about getting canceled is that they never had to suffer a season that was a huge decline in quality.

Now all that's left is Superman and Lois. Once something happens to that I'll be done with both the arrowverse and the CW in general.

[Kanon]

I guess everyone has heard the news that the DCEU as we know it is dead. Insiders say they're not even going to use The Flash movie as a springboard to reboot it, they're just going to pretend nothing happened and start from scratch. If that's the case, none of the 2023 movies will matter.

Given how far behind they are in building their cinematic universe compared to Marvel, this strikes me as a horrible idea. Well, at least we'll never have to see Jared Leto as the Joker again.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Kanon

If that's the case, none of the 2023 movies will matter.

If the movies are good, I care very much. I had a lot of fun with Aquaman, The Suicide Squad, Peacemaker & Shazam as their own entries without caring about interconnected universe. If Aquaman 2 & Shazam 2 are gonna be as fun as their OGs then I'd be more than happy to watch them.

Originally Posted by Kanon

Given how far behind they are in building their cinematic universe compared to Marvel, this strikes me as a horrible idea. Well, at least we'll never have to see Jared Leto as the Joker again.

No Joker Leto, no Lex Eisenberg, no dour Superman, no old Batman, no rapist Wonder Woman, no lame Cassandra Cain, no MoS, no BvS, no Josstice League, no Trailer Park Squad, no WW84, and no other bad things from DCEU sounds like a nice idea. And Batgirl movie was considered so embarassing that the WBD execs chose to wipe it off the face of the Earth as a tax write-off instead of releasing it to the masses.

Also, the actors who played Aquaman, Cyborg & Flash are no longer options to play those parts anymore:

• Jason Momoa wants to quit Aquaman after A2 and plays Lobo instead.
• Ray Fisher quit the Cyborg role due to some various conflicts after Josstice League.
• Ezra Miller is now a criminal who only causes headaches for WB-Discovery.

So yeah, DCEU was already in shambles before James Gunn's decision.

[MeoTwister5]

At this point this is probably the best decision for Gunn to make. The current DCEU has a ridiculous amount of baggage and controversy drowning it right now, further hampered by the less than graceful (re)exit of Cavill as Superman again. There's even talk of Dwayne wanting to jump ship and join the MCU for some reason.

[Wandering Soul]

The DCEU was pretty much of life support before, so Gunn's decision was probably for the best.

[Kanon]

It would have gone smoother if they didn't make Cavill announce he was coming back as Superman.

Looking back on it, the DCEU was pretty much doomed from the start when they let Snyder handle it. Yes, I'm one of those people who think he's a complete hack rather than a genius. Man of Steel was crap. Batman vs Superman was even more crap. Snyder cut was 2 hours of crap added to the already huge pile of crap that was Josstice league.

IMO they should just drop the idea of a DCEU. Just keep making movies like Joker and the Batman, which were well received critically and commercially. Be different from Marvel where you need to have watch dozens of movies and series to fully get what's going on in their newest entries.

[Tactics]

Man of Steel is 50:50 IMO

First half you can see Nolan exploring Clark moral compass and shown how problematic to have Superman IRL. Second half is definitely Snyder wanted that edgy action.

Can't blame DC for that, Marvel set the bar of "simple topic, lead to action" so people tend to avoid superheroes that requires thinking more than necessary as Avengers booming.

The Batman audience in my local cinema AFAIK mostly people who curious to see if it able to compete with TDK;
Compare to Multiverse of Madness where the audiences are including kids, teenagers on date, Marvel enthusiasts that can't stop talking about how multiverse have big implication, etc.

Heck, none of my colleagues wanted to watch it because "Batman screams less action, more thinking".