DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Unless you go to every single movie that gets made I suspect you form opinions on them before they're released as well.
Ridiculous.
We all know the best way to consume entertainment is to observe it from afar, judge it, and then watch it and confirm our biases.
They haven't even started shooting the damn thing. But you're already out there spouting about how it is doomed to fail.
But, well, that's your shtick, isn't it. You complain. That's all you're here for, it appears. I mean, just a while ago you posted this:
They really are sending 'Blue Beetle' out to die.
That's right, a complaint that WB/DC aren't promoting Blue Beetle enough. But what happens when, just a few days later, they indeed released a new trailer? Well, you posted this:
Oh, no, they actually promoted Blue Beetle! Your previous complaint isn't valid anymore, you quickly have to find something else to complain about, namely that they "show all the key points of the movie" in the trailer. Something that, like you yourself acknowledge, many trailers do, not just this one, but also it's something you couldn't possibly know. The movie hasn't been released yet, so nobody knows if there will be more key points. I seriously doubt that they were all in that trailer. Susan Sarandon's the villain of the movie, but she's hardly in that trailer.
You're not just complaining, you're grasping at straws to find things to complain about. It's almost like your one of those YouTubers going for the eternal doom and gloom in order to get the most clicks for their videos. But I suspect you're not. You probably are just somebody who has watched too many of these videos, and your brain is now trained to just find flaws and never any upside.
Last edited:
Only on whether it looks interesting. I never judge quality before experiencing…anything.
More importantly, he's the guy who made The Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy, The Suicide Squad, and Peacemaker, and I think those give you a lot more insight on what to expect from Superman: Legacy than the fact that he might have been a little overzealous in his praise for The Flash.
Interesting.
Guy Gardner, Mr. Terrific, Hawkgirl & Metamorpho.
Ah, yes--the film that was supposed to be Cap 3, but was more like Avengers 3. It also seems like its taking a page from Black Adam--another film where the main heroes facing off against Adam were not A-listers, with some created during the Golden Age.
I believe some might hope beyond hope that the appearance of other heroes in the DCU's debut film will turn it into anything other than a "pure" Superman solo film, but WB+D does not have the option to bring a group of B-list characters together through solo movies, or is only giving that solo space (in this first er....phase) to Supergirl.
Oh well. Maybe I shouldn't have complained anyway. Especially since I won't be watching it.
I've enjoyed most of his output but there is a through line of his work involving misfit underdogs and/or trashy material. Superman really doesn't seem to match up at first blush. Now, I'm not all the sky is falling, the movie will suck, the world's coming to an end or anything but it does give me pause and to be curious how it will turn out. We're just talking initial impressions and thoughts here, I don't think anyone has outright decided to shit-can the movie unseen except maybe some of the die-hards from the last regime.
Lots of filmmakers like to challenge themselves and try new things. Heck, Sam Raimi was known for low-budget horror films before he made Spider-Man. The Russo Brothers were known as sitcom directors before they did the dark spy thriller Captain America: The Winter Soldier and then became the Avengers guys. Steven Spielberg followed up E.T. and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom with The Color Purple and Empire of the Sun, then followed up Jurassic Park with Schindler's List. The things that make a good director are not limited to one type of story.
Holy crap, they're desperate to recoup some of the record losses. They're like 5 months after the buddle burst on the NFT junk.
https://www.ign.com/articles/the-flash-movie-will-soon-be-sold-as-an-nft
https://www.ign.com/articles/the-flash-movie-will-soon-be-sold-as-an-nft
A few reasons.
1. the DC "Extended" universe was what i consider a "false" name... it was truly more of a FILM universe. They completely blew their chance of making it an "extended" universe" by not incorporating the new CW TV shows. Had they done so, they could have had a whole lot of synergy early on (they DID do some cross marketing for a movie in the near end of the CW runs), and could have had a jump on Disney + / did it even better than Agents of SHIELD first season.
2. No one is that invested in the DCEU anymore, anyway (certainly not corporate)
3. People use different names all the time, depending on their history or passion. So Mumbai vs. Bombay ... or here in Chicago: Sears tower vs. Willis Tower, Comiskey Park/White Sox Park vs. U S Cellular Field/Guaranteed Rate Field/sponsor for the month Field
4. Everyone knows (or can figure out) what i am talking about. If not, Christopher can explain it to them
Holy overblown passions, Batman!
well, that's Christopher, for you. But also, i think we should mention how at least with DC, they have shoved animation in such a narrow field. It isn't part of their movie releases, nor major live action TV shows (the way the CW and Max shows have been)... so the audience viewing them is so narrow.... even more narrow, to me, than those who read Star Trek novels are compared to those who watch the TV shows & movies.
hence the "gehttoization" (yeah, whatever, Christoppher)
Into the SpiderVerse is the number 2 movie for 2023, "despite" it being animated...but because it was released as a mainstream movie, and not tucked away in some unknown/2nd tier media outlet
For me, it makes sense. This would be the way to jump start a new interconnected DC Universe.
Unlike the Marvel heroes, the public really did not need to be slowly introduced to them. They could have easily started with the Justice League, with a Superman or Batman movie ready to film just as that Justice League films was premiering. And then after the initial reaction, the 2nd follow-up would be based on whichever hero got the most buzz. Then make the next Justice League, and the "other" movie (Superman or Batman), and then a solo movie for one of the other heroes... and so forth
So, to me, what is planned makes sense to me, as long as they ready to go with the next project following one of those characters
I think it has been clear that Zaslav had certain opinions that are the driving constraints or Gunn.
Zaslav made it clear that Superman should be a billion dollar movie...especially since Aquaman, who was considered a joke for many years, was in fact a billion dollar international movie. So if Aquaman can do it, surely Superman could.
Also, i think Zaslav is the one who wanted Superman to be younger. So yet another restraint on Gunn. He is just trying to make something work within those parameters.
You are totally missing the argument @Christopher . we all know that there have been dark characters before. But we want them associated with the "right" character. I think most critics of the DCFU will agree that there was in fact the right character mix for the Justice League...it's just that SUperman didn't get to that "right place" until the the middle of Justice League, when it should have been from the first movie, which gave him a bad set up, despite having a good actor for the role.
i think it makes sense or them to do it... ithink as long as Superman "feels like" Superman... no, not the early Silver age/late Golden age stories, but just the vibe that the MCU Captain AMerica was able to capture well.
that's so desparate. But i did some number crunching, just to help me understand why they would cancel Batgirl but keep Flash.
So assuming that marketing is 50% of the movie's budget.
Let's round Batgirl up to $100 million (especially to account for any finishing touches). SO they would get a $50 million marketing budget. Flash was $200 million, with $100 million marketing.
Now, the number 10 movie for years 2019-2016 (pre-pandemic) averaged about $220 million domestically. I think WB was assuming that Batgirl would definitely be UNDER the top 10, while Flash might be a top 5 movie. Also, they might assumed that Female led movies do worse internationally than male led (with Wonder Woman having the highest domestic take of the DCFU, while Aquaman had the the highest Internatonal _ Domestic total, over a billion).
Meanwhile, on the tax write off side -- they could write off 25% of the costs by not releasing a film (but noting the expenses). And by not showing a film, they save that 50% marketing budget too.
So for Batgirl, they would have lost "only" $75 million by trashing it. If they had released it, even it it was #10 of the year, it might have only made $220 million, losing $80 million. maybe not much of a difference, but definitely wouldn't be worth the hassle. But more realisitcally, it might have only made $160 million domestic, meaning it would lose $140 million... twice as much as the tax write off. (Yeah, i didn't factor in international, but still would have lost more than the tax write off).
I still think it was a crappy decision, but i see the "logic". They also did NOT factor in lost revenue from talent going somewhere else and avoid WB-D.
Now the numbers for the Flash, which they were maybe thinking about:
The tax write off would have lost them $150 million... twice as much as Batgirl. They also had already spent some on marketing pre-pandemic ,no? If so, not sure if that was tax deductible.
Their "best case scenario" -- that the public really likes it as much as a Guardians of the Galaxy movie (which made $800million, at least combined DOmestic and iNternational)... that if the Flahs got $600 million, they could at least break even.
If they made $500 million, they would "only lose" $100 million... less than if they did the tax write off ($150 million).
Even only $460 million would lose them $140 million... a risk they might be willing to take, especially with streaming rights.
Covid was bad for them... but then with Miller's problems... the thing is, he was their biggest cheerleader back in the day. Now, when he first shouted "multiverse" i rolled my eyes, but recalled that statement and got excited when he appeared on the CW Crisis... that could have helped.... but naaaah... all the "good stuff was sabitaged.
And now we are awaiting Superman Legacy...and Creature COmmandos (?????)
I will confess, I was a little surprised when they announced Gunn was directing Superman: Legacy, for that very reason. But I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, and assume he knows what he's doing. Or at least will be able to make the best of a situation forced on him by Zaslav.
Last edited:
What those fans are talking about is that Warner Brothers started development of a Justice League film in 2007 that what would been a fully formed film with all the Justice League characters in it
There were delays, casting concerns, and in the end Warner Bros thought it would be too expensive and too big of a risk.
But if they had found a way to pull it off, it would have premiered right around the same period that the MCU started with Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk.
Directed by George Miller ("Mad Max"), based in part on Mark Waid's "Tower of Babel" Justice League run.
Cast and crew were ready to start filming when the Australian government balked at the price tag and pulled some of the funds earmarked for the shoot; causing a delay, then outright cancelation of the film.
George Miller went ahead and fleshed out the ideas in his for the movie "Mad Max: Fury Road".
Details can be found in the book "Blood, Sweat and Chrome". The authors devote a couple of chapters to the 'Justice League' movie.
If you look online you can find a couple of pictures of the cast (with a couple of stand-in) in costume.
