Man,thisdiscussion has gone too fast & furious for me to catch up...
Before i get into some quotes....
now that the DC Film Universe is dying...can we call the new one the DC Omni Universe? Yes, I know it would actually be OMNIVERSE (since they will cover TV, Movies and now games), but everytime i see news about this new regime, i keepsaying out loud "DC, Oh....you....."
This is a huge thread with a lot of points made. I don't know if it has been mentioned earlier, but for me, the issue with sequels/shared universes is a problem of the WB's, and now the DISCWB's (?), own making.
The root of the matter is that we have been promised a film universe multiple times in the past ten years. Back when the original announcements were made, people complained that DC was trying to force an MCU connected universe. Whether that was legitimate or not, the WB's plans fell apart spectacularly after 2017 with multiple attempts at course corrections. We were then promised the new and revamped connected multiverse at the end of COIE of the CW with a fairly extensive montage promising Green Lantern and Swamp Thing amongst others. When that fell apart, we got this idea that the Flashpoint movie would reboot their ideas again. And now, we have whatever Gunn is involved in -- again, with promises of big things across multiple films.
In all of these cases the point the production company is making is there is going to be a connected universe. This is what they are trying to sell us over and over again, but all we're getting is snake oil.
And for me, all of this is a completely separate issue as to whether I am going to see a DC movie in the theatre, rent it, or wait until it comes out on streaming. I've been a DC fan all my life and sure as s*** I am not going to miss a live action movie or series just to see the characters I love portrayed in a way I've been waiting for for decades.
But after ten years, DC has not earned my trust the way the MCU has that I am going to invest the energy and money to see these films in the theatre when they come out. I enjoyed Man of Steel, Wonder Woman, and (to an extent) Aquaman, but Suicide Squad and BvS were such huge disappointments that I now wait to hear reviews before making a decision. So far that has done me well.
I wish I had seen Birds of Prey and The Batman on the big screen and Joker and Shazam! I would not have minded, but The Suicide Squad, BvS, WW84, Justice League, and now Black Adam all make me glad I didn't waste my money. When I find 40% of your films are such huge disappointments, why would I trust any new films coming out--or why would I even want to listen to this new fancy package of connected films you are trying to sell to me when all of your previous offers have fallen apart faster than a Trump business deal--and why would I care about sequels when the first or second films have been disappointing.
I would be wary of expecting Aquaman 2 to make a billion dollars even if it had incredible reviews and the death of the overarching universe had never been announced.
Black Adam was shut out of a Chinese release for, as far as I can tell, no particular reason whatsoever beyond the fact that China is less and less interested in letting any non-Chinese movies in their theaters. One look at the MCU shows how quickly this can turn into a long-running thing with China, as well, so I'll believe the remaining DC movies actually get a Chinese release when it happens.
And when you realize that Aquaman made almost a quarter of its global total in China, the possibility of the sequel not getting released there is not good news for its box office.
I saw someone (El Mayimbe? not sure on trustworthiness) claim that the reason there has been confusion over Gal's role in the Flash is because Gal was in the Henry Cavill scene that got cut from the movie. So *a* cameo of Gal Gadot has been cut from the movie, but she also had a different cameo earlier in the film that has not been cut.
China has been mixed with releases. Avatar 2, for example, is releasing in CHina. If Aquaman 2 doesn't feel "proAmerica/anti-China", they might be willing to release it...also, if there are no controversies where Americans would
not want to follow China's rules, that could allow for a CHina release
You've got a great point here although we'll argue regarding DC finding their groove with the stand alone films. The reason they pushed for a universe-building approach is because that's what they thought was working for Marvel. They totally forgot about providing a good story first which is why Marvel movies are so successful. Not saying every Marvel movie is great but they are much better than DC's.
So it's not that the more 'stand alone' movies worked because they rejected 'universal continuity'. They just simply concentrated on making a better movie, getting better actors, etc...Joker and The Batman are better movies. They can easily fit into some universal continuity if they wanted.
I would agree.... i think though, because of early success, that built a fanbase that now follows everything Marvel, and more importantly, talks about it on social media with friends. Thus, they don't needas much paid marketing, as fans are doing themselves for free. (See season 1 of the Flash TV show)
I've been thinking about how Joker and The Batman can fit into an extended universe. The Joker could easily join Cavill's Superman, Black Adam and the Justice Society on Earth 2. The current Batman can easily fit into a new Earth 1 universe along with the movies that Gunn is planning right now.
I am not saying this is going to happen, but it would be cool to have Earth 1 and 2 -- and keep it at two earths on screen. Audiences can get behind that I think.
I wonder how or if they will even approach a multiverse? It sounds like Zaslav wants a post 1985-Crisis world. He feels it's too much for audiences to handle, so he wants it all in one package.
We will see, but i am not hopeful right now
So I take it Peacemaker is gone as well?
Oh well...
LOL--that will be the one show that does survive, and may even have been a condition that Gunn had when signing on.
Yeah, i am thinking Peacemaker will be DC's version of Deadpool. I have a hard time thinking Gunn would be willing to throw out his own creation, unless he is getting such gobs of money to forget about it. Where exactly is Peacemaker season 2 in production? Which then reminds me -- where does this fit in Gunn's schedule??
Marvel's great success is that it somehow managed to make Marvel Studios itself, and not its characters, the franchise. We've gotten so used to it by now that we forget how uncommon and unprecedented that is. People will get excited to see something they've never heard of like Guardians of the Galaxy -- characters who weren't even first introduced in a previous film -- simply because it's a Marvel film. Fandom not of a director, a property, or a series, but the studio itself. Even my least geeky co-workers and friends know what Marvel is.
DC's yet to achieve that. Superman and Batman are franchises. DC is not. Most people don't know DC as a thing. Warner/DC, along with everybody else in Hollywood, want in Marvel's action, where the studio itself is somehow the main star. The question is how.
I would disagree. If you ask the general public (i.e. no one on this board) -- if you say Superfriends, or ask which heroes hang out with Batman & Superman, you will get some responses.
No no. By every conceivable metric DC/WB has done poorly. Or at least not to their expectation. That's why there's a change in leadership; to steer the franchise into something that is more widely acclaimed and makes money. Not just barely break even or wonder if they're gonna make a profit at all.
I totally get there are DC fans out there that are happy with whatever they get and maybe they like the somewhat 'rawer' 'darker' take on the superheroes but it wasn't working for the wider audience. They can't cater to the uber-fan that will eat up anything regardless.
Yeah.....the thing is, i agree with Zaslav that Superman
should make a billion dollars. I mean, just draw the diamond, and omit the S, and most kids will know who that represents. They know Batman and Wonder Woman.
If they did it right, they could have
led with the Justice League, and immediately followed with a SUperman movie, and both would be hits.
But this is such a mess,a dn now run by a guy who wants to make the money, but does so with out the soul to get it.
Great points. That's why I doubt something like Blue Beetle will register out there. DC hasn't created that trust with the general audience. Yet Marvel can make a movie featuring a talking raccoon and a sentient tree and kills at the box office. Why? Because they've consistently made quality movies over a decade plus. DC hasn't.
I am wondering... how much would the Blue Beetle movie tie into either the DCFU or the DCOU? Or is it pretty standalone? Could it survive into the next regime?
This could be a test. Didn't Zaslav promise to make the next movies "even better" for their eventual release?
I imagine it will be very apparent that this new extended universe will test the waters with a film (presumably a Superman movie) that is chock-full-of-Easter Eggs / teased plotlines leaving no doubt in audiences' minds that a universe is forming. That said, if the film underperforms and Zaslav (and the higher level shareholders) cry out "No more!", the Gunn Superman might be a one-and-done, with the next DC movie script conveniently forgetting the aforementioned Easter Eggs / teased plotlines, hoping the audience forgets it, too. From there, all DC content might go the route of Joker and Reeves' Batman.
If its successful in building a strong, running story (as seen in the DCEU's MoS/BvS/WW/SS/AM/ZSJL), the new DCU might have a chance. Certainly, anything Gunn attempts (with the exception of MCU-izing DC content, which failed with Whedon) would be more encouraging than the overflowing toilet attempt that was Berlanti's CW/DC Arrowverse (with one outlier, which Berlanti had no creative control/influence over)..
Sorry, but the Batman vs. Superman x 3 plotline wasn't that strong. The timing also was such that it came across as a lame ripoff of the Thanos Infinity Wars saga. ANd yes, i
know in the comics, it was Marvel ripping off DC. But to many people, it is 3 differently colored boxes vs. 6 different colored round stones, and a head villain who is big, dark, and rough looking and with plans that affect the universe.
Anyone know what James Gunn's taste in superhero comics is? That might give an indication of DC Entertainment's future direction. It would say something about his sensibilities, at the least. I know he's a huge comic book fan -- probably a bigger one than any other MCU director -- but what specific books or writers? I know he raved about the recent Strange Adventures comics starring Adam Strange a while back.
So far, it sems kinda goofy. Looking at what he has done with both Marvel and DC.Now, i think he is smart enough to see the bigger picture. i am not sure what he will do as many of the big events have just been done (Crisis and Flashpoint)
It was a thoughtless, dick-headed move; after all of the effort from Johnson and his agents to bring Cavill back (recall Cavill's enthusiasm about it) Gunn pulls the rug out from under him.
.
Except it isn't really him making the call. James is a hired Gunn (pun firmly intended). What he is doing is simply carrying out the wishes of Zaslav.
Zaslav is the one who has been crying out that Superman should be a billiion dollar movie (which i actually agree with,though certainly not
how Zaslav is doing it), and
Zaslav is the one demanding a 10 year plan. Doing the math, that will mean Cavill will be in the role for 20 years at the end of it...while he might still look good at that age, he won't be able to carry Superman further than that. Look at SPiderman. Sony is just as greedy as Zaslav, but they had the added desperation of
having to do a Spidey movie in a short amount of time. And instead of trying to continue the universe with a masked actor giving Miles Morales the mantle, they tried a reboot, which failed to go farther than a 2nd movie. So Tom Holland comes along, and is embraced. the thing is, TOm Holland came at about the time Tobey Maguire would have finished a 5th and final film anyway, so the transition is good, and now Holland can have a similar reign.
By the way, Gunn seems to be trying to be as diplomatic and respectful as possible, and i don't see any evidence countering that.
Johnson and his agents aren't in charge, though. Their mistake for thinking they're bigger than the company they were hired to work for.
The thing is... the company that hired him is
not the same company that is now in control (i.e. the Repoublic becoming the EMpire... lots of continuity, but lots of change).
With all the delays due to Covid and more, what Johnson was aiming for was legit....it's just Zaslav said "screw y'all.... i want to make money"
Matt Beloni's column in Puck News (the daily industry newsletter)...
Poor Henry Cavill. The indignity of announcing via an Instagram takeover your triumphant return as Superman, followed weeks later by your swift exit as new DC co-head James Gunn writes his own younger Man of Steel movie. The timing here is especially awful: Cavill revealed his return a day before Gunn and Peter Safran were revealed as the new DC leaders.
So it appears as though Warner Bros.’ Mike De Luca and Pam Abdy let the Cavill press happen knowing pretty well that his future was in flux. (In their defense, Cavill had already been strong-armed by Dwayne Johnson into the Black Adam credits sequence… though De Luca allowed that, probably thinking he might get control over DC.) Hilariously, in a pre-taped town hall of their own today, De Luca and Abdy regaled the Warners studio as a “safe space” for talent. Unless you’re Superman, I guess.
"Safe space"....the list of people who can credibly counter that narrative is growing...and all of those things will sabotage the DCOU. ANd for those going/stayng with Marvel, it will just strengthen them over there
