Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think Warner is still suffering from the same problem it has for decades - the studio bosses just absolutely don't get this super-hero thing.   And this article about David Goyer probably sums it up: … ecade-ago/

This movie was Warner execs throwing their hands up in the air saying they didn't know what else to do.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I can't judge a film based on how much it cost to make. The audience was there. It made a lot of money. The general audience reaction to it has been good. The studio spent a lot of money, but that is really their problem. We don't know what deals they struck or how they balanced it all out. It really isn't for us to try to guess their happiness with how much return they got on their investment. We can judge the audience side of it, and in audience terms, it doesn't matter if the film's budget was huge or small. The audience went, and I think that anyone expecting it to be the biggest movie success ever was dreaming (and I may be guilty there too). It is the sequel to a movie that did well, bit not great. And it is about the billionth time these characters have been on screen. Add to that the fact that young kids can't go... Why would this movie be the highest grossing movie of all time? To comic book fans, it is huge to see these characters together. To random people who don't care, it might as well be Alien vs Predator.

I still say that the bad publicity pushed a lot of casual viewers away, and that had nothing to do with the quality of the movie. The press was out to kill this movie for a long time. It didn't work entirely, bit they left a mark.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

TF, that article misrepresented some of the quotes. Snyder wasn't diminishing Goyer's work. He was talking about the process in developing the BvS idea and opening up that universe. I don't remember where I read the original quote, but it is way out of context there.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

I still say that the bad publicity pushed a lot of casual viewers away, and that had nothing to do with the quality of the movie. The press was out to kill this movie for a long time. It didn't work entirely, bit they left a mark.

Yeah, possibly, but word of mouth usually corrects that.  If casual people loved BvS, they would've told their friends and they would've seen it.  I don't buy that critics have that much power.  I listen to my friends more than I listen to critics.

They can fix a lot of this with Justice League.  I just don't know if I trust Snyder to fix it.  The script can be lighter than BvS, but I don't know if Snyder is the guy to film it.  And even if he is, I wonder if he's already burned through most of his goodwill.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Word of mouth can help, and I don't think that the critics destroyed the movie's chances. But the negative news articles in the months leading up to the release, coupled with the reduced overall audience because the young kids can't go probably drove some numbers down.

These things are usually a machine that runs on excitement. Star Wars is not a great movie and none of the prequels were good. Yet the level of excitement in the press definitely built the audience. I have no idea how the movie turned out because I had to get past my annoyance with the marketing before I could think about seeing it. But the trailer revealed pretty much nothing about the plot, so it isn't like people were excited about that element.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Speaking of wasting money, did you guys see that James Cameron and 20th Century Fox are making FOUR Avatar sequels at the same time.  Did anyone ask for that???

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

That is such a big mistake. They're looking for a new Star Wars. I haven't heard anyone talk about Avatar in years though. I never even bothered to see it, because it looked like some thinly veiled "lesson" movie. Blah blah big oil whatever.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well it was a huge movie.  Made a ton of money.  But had zero cultural impact.  I'd want to see the first sequel succeed before I committed to FOUR.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Exactly. A lot of the success had to do with the technology involved. 3D isn't as big as it was when that movie came out. More of the sequel success will revolve around creating a good movie. Was the first one actually good?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

That is such a big mistake. They're looking for a new Star Wars. I haven't heard anyone talk about Avatar in years though. I never even bothered to see it, because it looked like some thinly veiled "lesson" movie. Blah blah big oil whatever.

You ever see the story of Pocahontas?  Then you pretty much saw Avatar.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

Was the first one actually good?

It's the most overrated movie of all time.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Yeah, that's what I figured (one response to two separate posts!).

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

With JK Simmons and now Willem Defoe being cast in Justice League, I'm starting to suspect that we might get Spider-Man showing up at the end of this film's trailer too!

Apparently, Defoe will be a good guy. Beyond that, we don't have much info. Any guesses?

The film definitely has a solid cast. I wonder if they're going right for Darkseid or if they're saving that for Justice League 2? They've been hitting all of the super powerful Superman villains so far. I hope we get another Superman stand alone movie, just so we can see him take down someone like Metallo, who isn't necessarily a "destroy the world!" type of villain.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, if it's anything like BvS, it'll be the KnightFall storyline, the Kingdom Come storyline, the Flashpoint storyline, the formation of the Teen Titans, and a lot more of Dark Knight returns all in one wink

In all seriousness, they've said it will be lighter in tone.  Hopefully it's actually one villain and not some sort of obscure alien/robot invasion like Avengers.  What I'd like is for the first part of the movie to establish these guys and their powers.  I want to see what each of these guys can do.  Have a scene where they come together but get defeated because they can't work together.  Then team them up properly to take whoever down.

Maybe Mongul first?  And save Darkseid for the second movie?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

No one betting against Jim Cameron's ginormously budgeted gambles has ever won. That said, past performance is not necessarily indicative for future results.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The Jungle Book...

Budget: $175 million (plus marketing)
Total domestic take thus far: $191,477,426   
Total Foreign take thus far: $341,300,000   
Equaling: $532,777,426

Pretty good, right?

Batman v Superman (after it's second week, assuming my numbers are right):

Budget: $250 (plus marketing)
Domestic: $260,408,047
Foreign: $422,500,000
Total: $682,908,047

I'm not going to compare movies. I'm going to compare media reactions... For the Jungle Book, I've seen a lot of stories about its huge success and how much people love the movie. Nothing about not fining an audience. Nothing about how much they need to make in order to make up for the cost of marketing. I could just be missing those articles, but I haven't seen them.

So, why the difference? The Jungle Book is a family friendly movie which people will probably see multiple times. It didn't bring in as much money in terms of product tie-ins (based on what I've seen in stores, it's just not as visible as BvS). So if all things are equal, shouldn't the articles be written about how disappointing this big budget movie with a lot of A-list names behind it is?

I'm fascinated by the media portrayal of Batman v Superman. I can't help it. I have nothing against The Jungle Book. It's doing well. But the overall narrative is that BvS failed to connect to an audience and that it was a failure, despite the fact that it did pretty well at the box office (especially for a movie that kids can't see) and actual audience reactions have been favorable. Where is the media coming from? What is their angle? Is a flop a better story?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Per Box Office Mojo

Batman v Superman
3/25-3/27 - $166,007,347
4/1-4/3 - $51,335,254 (-69%)
4/8-4/10 - $23,363,079 (-54%)
4/15-4/17 - $9,028,356 (-61%)

Jungle Book
4/15-4/17 - $103,261,464
4/22-4/24 - $61,538,821 (-44%)

2/12-2/14 - $132,434,639
2/19-2/21 - $56,470,167 (-57%)
2/26-2/28 - $31,115,195 (-44%)
3/4-3/6 - $16,725,929 (-46%)

I don't think the actual numbers are the problem.  It's the drop off, implying that people didn't go back.  Everyone went and saw it week 1, and that was it.  By week three, it wasn't in first.  Last weekend, it was 6th.  It was dethroned by a comedy - The Boss - and has yet to beat it.

Being a success is one thing.  I think everyone thinks it was a success.  But it hasn't really "found an audience" - people saw Daredevil multiple times.  People are seeing Jungle Book multiple times.  And in both cases, people are telling their friends to go see it, and they are.  That isn't happening with BvS.  Everyone went and saw it, and the people that waited didn't go.

Now did the press hurt it before those people could go see it?  Maybe.  But if the media tells me that a movie is terrible but my buddies tell me that it's great, I'll see it.  That's why I watched 10 Cloverfield Lane.  So the media might affect the first week, but the first week was fine.  It's the second week, which I think is a based more on word of mouth, that is the problem.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

That doesn't explain the fascination with including their (rumored) marketing budget in with the movie's budget while failing to include product tie-ins with the profits. They're inflating the cost of the movie while deflating the earnings, just so they can make the story sound more grim.

One thing that I think may have hurt return viewing was the announcement of the extended cut so close to the theatrical release. If I see that, I'm not going to bother going to see it in the theater again. I'm going to save my money and wait for the extended "real" version of the movie. I think the movie will do well when it comes to home video.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't see how you can avoid bringing up the cost of marketing to explain why BATMAN VS SUPERMAN cost more than its $250 million budget. THE JUNGLE BOOK, with half a billion after two weeks and a 44 per cent drop, won't struggle to turn a strong profit even with a theoretically BVS level marketing and production budget by the end of its theatrical run.

BVS, in contrast, is reported to need to earn $925 million to be considered profitable and it's currently at $850 million after four weeks. This is most definitely not what Warner Bros. was hoping for; the expectation was that this film would earn half a million domestic and half a million foreign by its second weekend and reach 2 billion by week three or four.

I don't think BVS is a failure, but it's not the runaway success that one would have expected a Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman film to be. If the budget had been lower, it would have been superbly successful; as it stands, it's making moderate money.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

It's also not really a movie that lends itself to be seen multiple times, I don't think.  I'm pretty sure I've seen every Zach Snyder film, but the only one I've watched repeatedly is, oddly enough, Dawn of the Dead.  I also think, while that movie is certainly grim, that it's his most fun movie.

(I found his filmography, and I saw that he did Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole, which I bet is both less grim and more fun than any of Snyder's other films put together.  I don't know.  I haven't seen it.  Leaving in my mistake for reference sake)

When 300 or Watchmen or even Man of Steel come on, I watch a little of it and then I find something else.  It isn't that I didn't like those movies, but they're always so heavy and you sorta have to watch the whole thing to get any enjoyment of it.


Yeah, everyone dies in Dawn of the Dead....but you only know that if you watch the post-credit stuff.  And it's a zombie flick.
Everyone dies in 300.
In Watchmen, the bad guy wins and the good guys are okay with it.  The only good guy that isn't is murdered.  And then, possibly, ruins everything by exposing it.
Sucker Punch, most of the girls die, right?  The main girl survives, but she's now by herself and alone.
And in Man of Steel, Superman comes into his own, but he had to murder a guy and be a party to hundreds of thousands of deaths for it to happen.
And in BvS, Superman dies and there's this ominous threat that something is coming and it's up to Batman, Wonder Woman, and three guys we saw on video to save the day.

I saw every one of those movies except 300 in theaters.  I didn't walk out of any of those movies depressed or anything, but they're not the kind of movie that puts a smile on your face.  Most of them are sepia-toned, dark, with this shroud of death covering the ending to each of them.

And so I think they're the type of movie that people watch, a lot of people like, and then that's it.  And while that's isn't the type of movie (like Deadpool or Avengers) that lends itself to making a ton of money.  And, of course, you don't have little kids begging to go see a movie again because no kids went to see this.

And if Snyder directs Justice League, I think you have to expect the same.  A lot of people will see it opening weekend, and there will be a sharp decline.  At the end of the first month in theaters, it'll be an afterthought.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I still say that we should be asking whether it is successful from a box office perspective, not based on internal numbers at WB.

That said, when did the billion dollar expectation go up to two billion? That was never going to happen.

Once you factor in various product tie-ins, the movie is probably much closer to a billion, if not over a billion. If we are talking about things like the marketing budget, we have to include how much they made from tie-ins because it is part of how it all balances out. But again, that is getting into internal Warner Bros. business, which we couldn't really figure out even if we wanted to. And it is not something that is being done with every movie out there.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

There are reports that JUSTICE LEAGUE will be more lighthearted. And I will say this -- regardless of our issues with Snyder, he's a good director. I was not entirely on board with some of BVS, but it was certainly a memorable and striking film. ("Did your parents teach you that you mean something -- that you're here for a reason? My parents taught me a different lesson -- dying in the gutter for no reason at all.") Snyder wanted to be grim and downbeat and he does grim and downbeat very well. And I think that if he wants to be lighthearted and uplifting, he can do that as well.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't doubt that.  I think he is a good director.  I actually liked each one of his films, which is hard to say for any director.  I'd have to see the Legend of the Guardians movie to see how he handles lighter material, but I don't think that's gonna happen smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

As for the money -- nobody would spend $500 million dollars if the expectation was to do a touch better than break even. BVS is estimated to need to earn $920 million to be moderately profitable/not a disaster; surely Warner Bros. was hoping to do better than be moderately successful when they invested half a billion.

A lot of the media reports on BVS seem to be drawing on past history, specifically SUPERMAN RETURNS and AMAZING SPIDER-MAN II. Both films had high budgets with extremely optimistic projections. Both films were thought to be the starting point for multiple spin-offs and sequels that were approved well in advance of completion. Both films would, on the surface of it, seem to have been successful at box office.

But both films eventually turned out to be below the studio's needs and expectations; SUPERMAN RETURNS' modest profit and the likelihood that a sequel would earn about the same or less given the mixed reception made WB decide to wait out Brandon Routh's contract and shut down Bryan Singer's sequel. AMAZING SPIDER-MAN II, like BVS, was estimated to need to make $1 billion in order to be considered successful; $770 million and mixed reception likely meaning similar or less earnings for a sequel made Sony decide to shut down all the spin-offs and follow-ups.

And now we have BVS, which would appear to be following the ASM2 track of multiple sequels and spin-offs matched with a massive budget and the need for a near $1 billion dollar earning to be considered a success -- and basically limping its way there with massive drops in ticket sales every week. ASM2 also suffered from a lack of repeat viewings. History appears to be repeating itself --

Except WB is in too deep to cancel their spin-offs, so...

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

The Spider-Man situation seems to have had a lot of internal politics working against it as well. I think that was about more than money.

Yes, Warner Bros. needs to learn how to use their money more wisely. They need to improve their business model. In that regard, they are not succeeding.

However, if you want to get into the internal numbers and all of that, we need to know how much money the movie made on tie-ins, etc. We need to know every deal that was struck in regards to the movie.

Since I can't audit the company, I can look at the box office. To me, it looks like the movie made about as much as any movie that kids can't go to see.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Informant wrote:

One thing that I think may have hurt return viewing was the announcement of the extended cut so close to the theatrical release. If I see that, I'm not going to bother going to see it in the theater again. I'm going to save my money and wait for the extended "real" version of the movie. I think the movie will do well when it comes to home video.

One question that has been bugging me:

Why didn't WB release the "extended" version?  And why not "re-release" the extended version in theaters?

I'm serious.  Releasing an incomplete, lesser version of the movie seems confusing now that I think about it.  Most movies choose to avoid the R rating, but Deadpool showed that an R-rated film can make just as much (and, so far, more) money than a PG-13 film.  It's true that BvS was able to, for lack of a better term, "trick" some parents into taking their kids to their movie.  If a dad took his three kids to see BvS, that's $30-$45 that they probably wouldn't have gotten if they'd released an R-rated film.

There's also the teenagers who can handle the violence/darkness that couldn't legally pay for tickets to go see the movie with an R-rating.  They might sneak in to see it, but that gross wouldn't go to the studio unless they happened to buy tickets to another Fox film to sneak in.

But if the extended version reviews better, would that scare less people away from the theater?  Would it improve word of mouth?

Because this movie isn't for kids.  So the rating shouldn't be that big of an issue.  The length is a problem (181 minutes) but Interstellar 169 minutes.  The Revenant was 156.  The theatrical version of BvS is 153.  It'd be long, but the theatrical version never really dragged.  I complained it was much too long, but if it fixes some of the major flaws of the film?  If the extra 30 minutes makes Superman more likable?  Or helps with plot holes?

And even if they wanted to take advantage of PG-13, why not theatrically release the extended version now?

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

There is a rumor that the extended cut may get a theatrical release before the home video release. I guess we will see.

I don't think that it will change anything about Superman though. The perspectives will be largely the same. Unless they edited out Superman POV scenes, but I don't know how much I would expect that.

I think the studio probably wanted cuts for time and rating purposes. While I don't think it would change the tone of the movie, I'm sure that there is some good stuff that was cut. Personally,  I'd love to see the four hour version!

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant … ifferences … or-to-exit

Not to pile on the DC movies, but this is why I think DC needs a Kevin Feige.  If one person is in charge of the vision, then there's no confusion when hiring a director.  I know this has happened with Marvel (notably Ant-Man), but two directors leaving in one day is a sign that there's some issues at the top.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Wonder Woman lost its original director too... And you could say that Man of Steel lost about a thousand directors before it was eventually made.

If it were closer to filming those movies, I might be more worried. As it is, they announced a lot of that stuff a long time ago, before there were scripts and real plan in place. It's not like a whole concept is being scrapped, like with the various versions of Superman that never got made.

It's not great, for sure. I just don't think that it's a sign of doom, and I doubt that it has anything to do with the critic reviews of Batman v Superman. This is a big deal. The DC movies don't cheap out on directing style. I'm surprised that a first time director had the job in the first place.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well this is why I'd want to get someone in charge now.  Suicide Squad is done.  Wonder Woman is almost done.  So with Flash and Aquaman possibly needing new directors, get someone in there now who can be in charge during filming of Justice League and preproduction of the other movies. 

I mean, hiring someone to oversee this stuff isn't exactly a sign of surrender, is it?  And there'd be a million people who'd love to do it, and a thousand who'd be great at it.  This is a monumental thing they're attempting, and if DC wants to make bigger, smarter, stronger, films I'd think they'd need a Feige WAY more than Marvel does.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

You're assuming that there is no such oversight. I've seen no indication that they have a hole that needs filling.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I've read the same thing you've read.  That there's a bunch of people filling that role.  That it's sorta Geoff Johns and sorta Zach Snyder and sorta some other people.  But Geoff Johns plate is way too full, Snyder can't be directing everything and also in charge of other stuff.  Also, I think he's the wrong guy tongue

I'm not hating on DC.  I like those characters better so my hopes are higher for it.  And I just think DC/WB is kind of a mess.  Just like Fox is kind of a mess with X-Men and Fantastic Four.  I think Marvel has the advantage of having everything in house (with a monster like Disney backing them) so all they have to worry about is this stuff.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I don't think that the Marvel method works. They aren't cohesive. Characterization, plotting and continuity are weak. If that is because they have one guy leading the show, then it is smarter for DC to have a few people reading the scripts and talking to each other to keep things in line.

The fact is, none of this is really new ground. TV shows have had different writers and different directors for decades. Different shows have different methods of breaking stories or writing them. We don't really know which method DC is using yet, or how well it will work. So far, we only have Man of Steel and Batman v Superman to work with, and those are the same team, because BvS was a sequel (ish). We will know more once Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman come out.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think the Marvel movies are as successful as they can in presenting the Marvel Universe as a single reality given that all the characters are from completely different genres that would ideally exist in their own world. As for DC -- stepping back from my personal opinions, I think we could all agree that creatively, DC is quite happy with their approach to their universe. WB executives stood up and applauded at the first screening of BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN. They didn't cancel any upcoming movies. They are looking to add a bit more humour. Aside from that, however, they're continuing as planned.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'm still not sure why it has to be so black and white.  The Marvel way or the DC way.  I think there can be middle ground on all this stuff.  DC could take bits and pieces of Marvel's strategy without admitting that Marvel is better than them.  Just because Feige isn't doing a good job doesn't mean that it's a bad idea or that it would harm DC in any way.

Of course, if that person is ever Zack Snyder....a group of voices would be way better.  Let's at least have non Justice League movies be fun wink

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I mean... I agree that there needs to be some person or people who are in charge of these projects, if that's what you mean. Like the Executive Producer of a TV series would do.

But whether that's one person or more, I can't really say which would be better.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant … 33263.html

I agree with the one guy who was quoted, saying that the movie was a box office success. I think that the driving force behind the perceived failure of the movie are the critic reactions, which other articles use as the basis for their viewpoint. The actual audience reaction has been far more favorable than what the press has portrayed. I'm not saying that everyone loved it, but it hasn't been the type of hatred that the critics have had.

And the critics probably hate it because they have no clue who these characters are or what type of stories they're capable of, outside of the movies that have come out prior to this one.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

BvS was a box office success but didn't perform up to WB's expectations. The initial weekend was extremely strong, but the fall-off in ticket sales was huge.

Right now, between Flash losing its director, Aqua Man's director not sure if he wants to continue, the entirety of Batman's rogues gallery being in the stand-alone film the DC 'franchise' looks like a dumpster fire. WB let the wrong guy create their universe, and now they're desperately flailing about trying to save it. No, you don't have to copy Marvel to be successful (and I'm a long-time DC guy), but you do need to have someone somewhere who loves the source material. Someone has to be able to say, "let's get things going before we 'deconstruct' the universe."

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think Snyder has shown that he has a love of the source material. Everyone is making more drama here than there really is.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I think that while BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN was Informant's favourite movie of the year, the miserable reviews, crashing downfall in ticket sales after the first week and overall negativity towards the film can hardly be dismissed from a historical standpoint even if one disagrees with it from a personal standpoint.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Nor can its box office success, the vast difference between critic reviews and audience reviews, and the overwhelmingly slanted reporting on the film in the media. The fact is that the movie is basically divided in the same way as a comic book would be. The Marvel fan hate the DC stuff. The readers are divided on what they did like and didn't like. The plot and characters are being debated. And the mainstream people who don't like comic books don't get it one way or the other.

I never said that it was my favorite movie of the year (though, I've only seen one in a theater and whatever other movies I've watched were probably released in 2015 at the latest, so I guess it may win by default). I've never even said that I don't have any issues with the movie. There are things that I would have liked to have seen differently. I wanted a Man of Steel sequel that showed the progress of Superman. What we got was a Batman movie where Superman is used as a symbol in the minds of others rather than a character of his own for most of the movie. It doesn't take away from what the movie was, but it did leave me feeling like I didn't get the movie that I've been waiting for. Yes, I wanted what you guys wanted... the scenes of Superman being Superman. The only difference in opinion between us is that I acknowledge that that isn't the perspective of this movie and what we saw wasn't a reflection on his character, it was a reflection of how others saw him. So when they eventually make another Superman movie and he isn't grim and angry, or acting like a god that hovers over people, everyone will say that they are responding to criticism of this movie, when the truth is that it will just be the first time that we're actually seeing him in context since Man of Steel.

I didn't like what they did with Jimmy Olsen. They thought it'd be fun to do something really out there with a character that they had no plans to use in the future. The only thing saving that scene from being a serious ding against the movie in my book is the fact that they didn't name Jimmy in the finished product... but they probably will in the extended cut. Which leaves me unhappy. It was just pointless and did not honor an iconic character in any way.

I think that the "Save Martha" thing works, but it could have been smoothed out a little bit. Mostly, because a lot of people didn't get what was happening there and they thought that it was all about the name itself.

I think that the footage of Aquaman could have been done better. Same with Cyborg. But they pushed too hard to make Aquaman very visible, when he could have remained a blur or a silhouette. The footage was too well framed.

I think that there are a lot of little things that could have been done differently or better, but ultimately I liked the movie for what it was. It's not perfection. I don't think that it's as good as Man of Steel, but I think that it set things up nicely. I wasn't disappointed by it.

The only reason that I seem to obsessively defend the film is because the reporting on it is so incredibly biased and comments made about it based on those reports are frustrating to me. Today, I saw an article that claimed that Snyder would have had Batman prison raped if he were in charge of the Nolan movies. This was based on a comment that was taken out of context, where the writer of the article deliberately misrepresented what he was saying, just because it fit the idea that Snyder doesn't care about story, he is only interested in making things as dark and angry as possible.

THAT annoys the crap out of me. Suddenly changing the methods by which we measure a box office success annoys me. Ignoring the audience reaction, which has skewed far more favorably than critic reactions, annoys me. You know I'm willing to admit when something I like loses its shine. I don't do blind loyalty to anything. I think the anti-publicity campaign for this film is unlike anything I've seen since The Passion of the Christ though, and it annoys me to no end that there isn't more of an issue being raised about it. The reporting is flat-out dishonest.

Anyway, at this point I'm just repeating myself over and over again. There's probably nothing new to say about the movie, at least until it comes out on home video. So... whatever. smile

Suicide Squad!!!!

I saw an article talking about the sexism in the movie, because Harley Quinn is wearing hot pants and they're sexualizing the character. It went on to talk about how they're marketing toward the horny young men at the expense of women. Then they went on to rationalize the skin tight outfits on unrealistically fit men by saying that it's all about the male ego.

Which led me to believe that the article had nothing to do with the movies themselves, or seriously discussing the issues, but was using the popular Harley Quinn character and her skimpy outfit to attract attention to their article. Which makes their whole feminist slant pointless. smile

Three months until the movie comes out. Woohoo!!!

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well, I do feel sorry for Informant.  If you looked at the movie when I first saw it, I liked it a fair bit more than I do now.  It's only after I've really sorta tore at the movie that the flaws really bothered me.  It's an autopsy of the film that I don't usually do for many films.  And as I've said a couple of times, it's unfair to the movie but it also comes from a place of love.

Will Smith's I Am Legend is a pretty forgettable film, but it's relevant for a couple of reasons that have nothing to do with the movie itself.  The first is that I Am Legend was the movie that WB attached the prologue (the bank scene) to The Dark Knight in IMAX to.  If you went and saw the movie in IMAX, you got to see the opening scene to The Dark Knight.  That's why I saw the movie in theaters.  The second is an easter egg.  The movie takes place in the future, and there's a billboard in Times Square for a Batman/Superman movie.  That one easter egg is probably the most famous shot in the movie.

When Schumacher did his Batman films, he makes reference to Metropolis (in Batman Forever) and Superman himself (in Batman & Robin).  Those movies were horrible Batman films, but they hinted at a bigger universe and we loved it.

Bruce Timm made the Batman Animated Series and then the Superman Animated Series.  Then he brought them together in "World's Finest" (one of their finest episodes) and renamed the whole thing the "Batman/Superman Adventures."  One of the best episodes is when Superman comes to impersonate Batman.  One of the best episodes of Batman Beyond features an aged Superman.  Justice League ran for 5 seasons under two titles based around the adventures of Batman and Superman.

People have wanted to see BvS for decades.  Batman and Superman on the same screen.  How would it work?  What would it look like?  Who would play them?  Could they get Routh and Bale together?  Tom Welling?  Keaton/Kilmer/Clooney?  Would it be goofy?  Dark?  Funny?  Serious?  Who could possibly make that work.

And unlike any comic book movie ever, people wrote the movie in their heads.  What they wanted to see, how they wanted it to work, what villains they'd use, how the fight would look, who would be manipulating everyone.  Every line of the movie was written in everyone's heads years ago.

So when the movie came out, it had to compete with everyone's expectations.  Not only that, it had to compete with a Marvel Cinematic Universe that was almost a decade in.  And this was Batman and Superman, the two most beloved heroes in comic history.  Expectations were through the roof.

But the problems started before the movie was announced.  Man of Steel's ending had problems, and we were promised that a sequel would solve them.  Then came the casting of Ben Affleck (a controversial hire) to replace the was-never-going-to-happen-fan-casting-of Christian Bale.  And the odd choice of Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor.  Then we heard that the cast was bloating to include Flash and Aquaman and Cyborg.  That Wonder Woman would be heavily featured.  Man of Steel 2 was turning into a Justice League movie, and none of us knew how any of it would work.

There might've been Marvel folks who wanted the movie to fail.  And maybe some people who wanted to see a billion dollar franchise crash and burn.  I'm sure there were people that saw this as a desperate move to capitalize on the Superhero craze and wanted it to fail so these movies would just go away.

But I honestly don't think anyone went into this movie wanting to hate it.  People definitely went in with their biases, whether they hated Man of Steel or don't like Zach Snyder or Ben Affleck or the casting or the tone or whatever.  But people don't spend $166 million on a movie they aren't excited about.  For a movie they expect to hate.  And while this is a movie that I think most people liked, I don't think it's a movie that most people loved.  It's a controversial success at best and a mess at worst.

And, honestly, I think it was set up for failure because it could never be what everyone wanted it to be.

And, yeah, I think we've said everything about the movie but I just want to harp on one last thing:

I wanted a Man of Steel sequel that showed the progress of Superman. What we got was a Batman movie where Superman is used as a symbol in the minds of others rather than a character of his own for most of the movie.

You've mentioned this a bunch and I'm really having trouble connecting those dots.  It's almost like you're making the movie a bit like Rashomon, where we're seeing a skewed version of Superman because we're seeing him from the perspective of Batman.  And I don't get that idea from this film at all.  I understand that it is from Batman's perspective, but I don't get the idea that we're getting a distorted version of Superman that looks evil because Batman wants him to look evil.  I see a version of Superman that looks evil because the director needed him to look evil for his protagonist to get *any* benefit of the doubt from the audience.

Ironically, Man of Steel is on TV right now, and I just watched the interrogation scene with Lois.  Superman shows more personality when he's talking to Stanwick through the one-way mirror than he does for any public scene in BvS.  Cavill is able to show Clark's personality in intimate moments with Lois, Martha, and even Lex.  But every. Single. Public. Scene. Clark either looks angry, emo, or depressed.  When he's allowing a building to burn down as he allows people to worship him, scowling as he saves a rocket, creepily floating over begging flood victims or standing around doing nothing while the US Capitol burns.....he shows no emotion.  And if all of that is Batman's distorted perspective, that's fine.  If they did some clever trick where TV footage shows Clark putting out a fire, quickly saving the flood victims, and frantically saving two dozen senators, I totally missed it.  Because what I saw wasn't distorted Superman - it was just Zach Snyder's version of Superman.  A Superman I didn't like at all.  Clark is fine.  He's a good character that Zach Snyder cares about.  He's vulnerable and human and the best cinematic Clark Kent.

But Superman is a cold, distant, terrifying alien character without an ounce of humanity in him.  And I think Henry Cavill plays him that way.  And, again, unless I missed it, I saw no indication of Rashomoning.

And no matter how good the action is or how much you enjoy Affleck's Batman....if you get 1/2 of the title characters so incredibly wrong that they're the worst part of the movie for a huge chunk of your audience....that's a problem you just can't overcome for some people.  It'd be like if they nailed Superman but had a 60s Adam West - style Batman to face him up against.  It'd just ruin the movie, no matter how good they did Superman.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Feel sorry for Informant? Quite frankly, **** Informant. Informant can **** right off. Informant was looking forward to BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN and he enjoyed BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN and while we can debate its creative merits and earnings endlessly, it's set the direction that the DC Cinematic Universe is going to follow AND he's going to get an extended cut that will likely be in theatres. The only winner here when it comes to BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN is Informant.

And we should be pleased for that. It's a bit like how the Sliders Rewatch podcasters enjoyed "The Exodus" Parts 1 - 2. We despise those episodes, but I'm glad they enjoyed watching John Rhys-Davies get shot and blown up after getting his brain sucked out -- because we should never want anyone to have a bad time.

This was a rather caustic way of saying that I'm happy Informant's happy.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Well just that he's getting dogpiled.  I don't feel too sorry for him, or I wouldn't have continued to poke at the perspective comment big_smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Happy?! HAPPY?! Do you have any idea what it's like for me to watch a piece of crap movie like The Avengers, with plot holes that you could drive a Dyson's Sphere through, horribly direction, poor editing and a solid cast that's made to recite generic dialogue, and to have EVERYONE go on an on about what a great movie it is?! For that movie to be held up as the example of what all "superhero" movies are supposed to be from that point forward?!

Do you know what it's like to FINALLY get the type of Superman movie that you've been dreaming about since you were a little kid, only to have people slam it relentlessly for the very reasons that you think it works in the first place?

Do you know what it's like to get a movie like Batman v Superman, where there is actually some thought and consideration put into the story, the directing, the characters, the themes and perspectives, and then have everyone complain that it's not the f***ing AVENGERS?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!111

Just once in my life, I would like to get to enjoy a movie with the type of ease that Marvel fans or Star Wars fans get. No matter how much crap those franchises put out, the media loves them. They get a free pass on every f***ing thing that they do wrong. People are allowed to be excited about them without being smacked down at every turn. People are allowed to have a stupid, childish geekiness about them without constantly having to defend their very existence. Without having to deal with people who will not understand what you're saying about the movies, no matter how many f***ing times you repeat yourself!!!

I don't get to be happy. I get to be driven insane by the f***ing media who is constantly shifting their requirements of this movie, because they cannot allow it to be anything less than miserable failure in every sense. The same people who started slamming it months before it even came out and never had any intention of giving it a chance. Those same people are nothing but perky when it comes to the latest Star Wars piece of crap, or the latest Marvel piece of crap. Probably because they're getting paid to be excited about them.

I get to have conversation after conversation with people who, at the end of the day, really just wanted the Christopher Reeve movie re-released, with it's horribly casting, it's stupid primary colors and it's absurd script.

People keep making me out to be a super negative person, but I'm not. I want to be able to enjoy things in life, but I don't get that luxury unless I'm willing to give myself just enough brain damage to smile through the next f***ing Thor movie.

No, my favorite Shyamalan movie can't be The Sixth Sense, because that would be too easy. My favorite Hitchcock movie can't be Psycho, because that would be too easy. My favorite book can't be Harry f***ing Potter, because that would be too easy.

Do I sound happy to you?!

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

For the record, I think Batman v Superman is a better movie than Avengers.  I was never a huge fan of Avengers - I just thought it was fun to get those characters together.  I didn't love Age of Ultron either.

Outside of the reasons I gave, I don't know why the media is harder on DC than Marvel.  I think it's a matter of expectations and effort.  But I still think the entire movie changes if you make a few tweaks here and there.  And I'm choosing to blame Snyder for creative choices (because I know Cavill can make Clark have personality).  I look at it like the Star Wars prequels (which, by the way, were ripped apart just as much as this if not way worse - some people probably really liked them) - Hayden Christiansen and Natalie Portman are good actors who acted wooden because Lucas made them.  Snyder had Cavill act a certain way, and I think it made the movie worse as a result. 

But if the media is really upsetting you and taking the movie away from you, don't let them.  You're still going to get your extended version that should be an improvement over a movie you already liked, and you're still going to get Snyder's Justice League.  The media isn't gonna be able to do anything about that.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

From my perspective, Informant, you have plenty of reason to be happy. You got MAN OF STEEL, which you liked, followed by BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN, which you liked, which earned enough money that you're going to get SUICIDE SQUAD, WONDER WOMAN, AQUAMAN, THE FLASH, JUSTICE LEAGUE, SHAZAM, GREEN LANTERN CORPS, JUSTICE LEAGUE II and THE BATMAN from the same creators. If the fact that other people disliked BVS diminishes your enjoyment of a film clearly tailored to your obsessions, then the problem is on your end; you have put entirely too much of your mental territory into the hands of strangers.

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

I'm sure I'll live. But I have a habit of reading entertainment news, so it is annoying. Even now, they're trying to kill the excitement over Suicide Squad, which has had nothing but positive reactions from the general audience. Why?


Anyway, when BvS comes out on home video, we should all watch it and comment at the same time. That way we can explain what we are talking about.

Or at least take more detailed notes. It's hard to be specific about a movie I saw once. smile

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Haha, I'm willing to do that.  It's only fair.

250 (edited by Informant 2016-05-06 15:14:07)

Re: DC Movie Universe by Informant

Looks like the disc could be out in July. … s-revealed

Screw it. I'm going to get geeky excited over it. I want to watch the movie again and analyze every little detail of it. Whoo!

Also, it looks like Affleck has been upped to Executive Producer status on Justice League. … 24121.html

It makes sense, actually. If the studio was worried about the tone of the franchise for some reason, they could be pushing to add another voice to the mix. Rather than create tension between them and Snyder, they turn to Affleck who has a good relationship with both parties, and is already part of the DCEU family, working on his own Batman movies. He was probably already voicing his opinions and being heard anyway. This gets the studio off of Snyder's back, gets the studio another set of eyes on set, and will undoubtedly help smooth the transition into those Batman movies.

I'm not usually a fan of Affleck's acting, but his directing/writing work has been pretty solid.