Dr. Doom is a Latvarian dictator and enemy of the Fantastic Four
Full disclaimer upfront: I am NOT talking about people who enjoy DC films, fans of DC characters, or anything like that. I'm friends on here with many people who like these movies. I'm talking specifically about the toxic folks who have ruined the reputation of DC fans. You know the ones. The ones who sent critics death threats after bad reviews came in, who have harassed others for not sharing their opinions, who have formed conspiracy theories about Disney paying critics, who claim that people who don't like BVS "don't understand it".
Toxicity exists in all fandoms, it's true. But why has the DCEU fandom become so infamous for this behaviour? Why do we see this again and again? I think there's something deeper going on; a set of social and psychological factors that melded together to create this problem. Specifically, I think there are six key factors that all led to a crisis point in DC fandom, which was the release of reviews for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. That was when this behaviour solidified and became a pervasive issue in our current film culture.
The key factors are:
1) The Success of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy
2) The Success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe
3) The Mixed Reception of Man of Steel
4) The First Cinematic Interpretation of the Trinity
5) WB Holding All DC Film Rights
6) Batman v Superman Reviews
I'm going to explore why these factors have affected the psychology of DC fandom, and why they all collided together to create the current state of DCEU fan culture post-BVS and now post-Justice League. With that, it's time to discuss . . . .
It Was Never Real: The Rise and Fall of the DC Extended Universe, and The People Who Supported It
Factor #1) The Success of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy
Back in 2005, the CBM landscape was radically different from where it was today. There was no notion of the "cinematic universe". Each CBM franchise was based on only one hero or team. Sequels were common, spin-offs were rare, and success stories were only now ramping up. At this time, the most successful running CBM franchise was Sam Raimi's then-in-progress Spider-Man Trilogy. Marvel had licensed out popular characters like X-Men, Fantastic Four and Daredevil, and films based on those properties were more common. DC films had mostly taken a back seat at this time, mostly because of Batman and Robin in 1998, which at the time was considered so bad that it may have "killed" the genre. While that was a ridiculous claim, it did dilute interest in DC films for several years.
That is, until Christopher Nolan decided to resurrect the Batman franchise with 2005's Batman Begins, which was a critical success and a fairly successful box office hit, adjusted for expectations at that time. It was a win for WB and DC as a whole.
There are a few reasons why Batman Begins did well. For one, it was really good. It came from a talented, visionary filmmaker, it was self-contained and did a good job telling its story, and it was a serious take on classic source material that struck a chord with fans. Batman was already considered the most profitable character in DC's pantheon by WB at the time. Superman had been taking a nearly two decade long break after Superman IV back in 1987, and Wonder Woman was nowhere to be found. But what really shocked WB was the sequel: 2008's The Dark Knight, which shattered all expectations with over a billion dollars at the box office, unprecedented critical acclaim, and the only Oscar-winning performance in a CBM.
There's no understating TDK's success. Every CBM that WB has made since TDK has been trying to replicate what made that film such a landmark achievement. But the fans have also been chasing the same high, for both the right and wrong reasons. TDK worked not because it was dark, but because it was exactly the movie it needed to be, uncompromised by studio interference or pandering to its intended audience. But it also gave fans something they took out of context: validation that their fandom was "adult fare".
TDK was at the Oscars. It was called a "crime drama" rather than a CBM. It aspired to something greater, which is good, but fans took this idea and ran it to an incorrect conclusion: that this type of CBM is inherently better than others, regardless of context. Suddenly, dark/gritty CBMs were an ideal in and of themselves for some fans, because TDK proved that comic books weren't "for kids", or whatever that means. It plays to the emotional immaturity in not being able to admit that superheroes are fun kids stuff at their core.
There's nothing wrong with CBMs that try to be deeper, that want to explore complex philosophical ideas. That's great for the genre. But having the superficial aspects of such a film, like a dark tone, or being more violent, or "realistic", are not inherently better. But DC fans were trained by the success of The Dark Knight films to regard one of their favourite characters as tied to that idea. Suddenly, DC films weren't "kiddie" fare like the Marvel movies. There were something more. They were something greater. Or so we thought.
Factor #2) The Success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe
"I'm here to talk to you about the Avengers Initiative".
With one line, Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury changed the cinematic landscape. For the first time, multiple superhero properties were going to collide on screen in the way that they had in comics for decades. Over four years, Marvel Studios slowly and successfully built their cinematic universe over six movies, and no one really knew how it was going to go. The individual films were mostly well regarded with critics and audiences, but The Avengers was a massive question mark.
That is, until The Avengers made $200 million domestically in its opening weekend. Every single studio in Hollywood stood up and took note. The game had changed. Now, everyone needed a cinematic universe. And so did DC. Outside of The Dark Knight trilogy, which ended the same year as The Avengers with The Dark Knight Rises, the DC film slate was mostly barren. Superman was getting a reboot with Man of Steel, but there wasn't much else since Green Lantern bombed the previous year.
Now there has always been Marvel vs. DC fandom rivalries. Hell, the companies themselves have played into it for sales with Marvel vs. DC crossover comics and the like. But I don't think DC fans were mad to see Marvel films succeed, at least at the time. But you see, with a film like The Avengers, everything changes. The Avengers made the dream of a full "shared universe" real. It wasn't enough anymore to have a Spider-Man movie, or a Captain America movie, or a Batman movie. Fans wanted to see their favourites share the screen.
And that entire dream was realized with one shot. You know the one:
That one shot crystallized that dream for Marvel fans around the globe. Of course DC fans wanted the same thing. How could you not? If The Avengers could be one of the biggest blockbusters of all time, surely the Justice League was next?
But here's the problem: there was no Justice League in development. There was a JL film in preproduction back in 2007, but it was scrapped. Now, all DC fans had to look forward to was next year's Man of Steel. It could be a start, sure, but would it live up to the hype?
We'll get to Man of Steel soon, but the wait for the DC Film Universe was going to be a long one. The MCU was four years old when Avengers dropped, and DC had question marks. TDK Trilogy was over. Would Christian Bale stay? Would they reboot Green Lantern? Where's Wonder Woman?
As the question marks piled up, Marvel kept rolling out success stories. Iron Man 3 made a billion dollars. Winter Soldier was a critical darling. Guardians of the Galaxy, a Z-list Marvel property, became a smash hit. The MCU kept winning, and DC fans had to wait year after year.
You see, while I do think there was some jealousy amongst DC fans that their preferred universe wasn't on the screen, I don't think they wanted Marvel to fail. They just wanted to see DC succeed too. But DC fans took something from the MCU that it never gave them: a promise. The promise that one day, they'd see the same success. That a DC Film Universe would show up to compliment Marvel's. But it was a promise that the MCU couldn't deliver. Only DC could do that.
Factor #3) The Mixed Reception to Man of Steel
I remember seeing this trailer for Man of Steel and being genuinely excited. The cinematography, the music, and the gravitas of it all. I still watch this trailer and get goosebumps.
This was the trailer that promised DC fans that their time was now.
Now, I know there are many people who unreservedly love Man of Steel, and that's great. I'm glad that they love the film, and there's nothing wrong with that. But the fact remains that the movie's overall reception was fairly divisive. Critics were split down the middle, and so were fans. Many loved it, many hated it, and the controversy surrounding Zack Snyder's take on Superman and the DC mythos was still being discussed until Batman v Superman's release.
What's important to remember is that Man of Steel wasn't just controversial within film culture, but within DC fandom itself. There are many Superman fans who felt that Man of Steel was a betrayal of the comic book character they loved. Many felt it was a bold, fresh take. Regardless of your personal feelings, Man of Steel was certainly not the start to the DCEU that WB wanted. They wanted an unmitigated success, and they thought they had replicated The Dark Knight's template to guarantee that.
You can plainly see the executive thinking at hand. Get a visionary filmmaker who can handle a comic book property, like TDK. Make it a darker and more violent version of a beloved character, like TDK. Use the character's more ominous sounding name for the title, like TDK. They let Zack Snyder do what he wanted with Man of Steel because they thought they had found the formula. Everything in Man of Steel is built for maximum gravitas, down to its orchestral musical score, its sweeping cinematography, the attempts to ground its hero in philosophy. But along the way, something fell apart. Man of Steel wasn't regarded as a masterpiece like TDK. It was called a fractured film, a movie that tried to say one thing but said something else. Warner Bros wanted to build a cinematic universe. Zack Snyder destroyed Metropolis.
Unlike the first Iron Man, which introduced the world to a wide universe they were excited to see more of, Man of Steel made audiences wary. Is this really the future for DC? Are these the movies that we're going to get? Are we sure this is the path we should go down?
Iron Man inspired confidence in Marvel's vision.
Man of Steel inspired trepidation in DC's.
But there still a reason to believe in the future. After all, Man of Steel was only one movie. The next one could bring it all together. At least, that was the hope.
Factor #4) The First Cinematic Interpretation of the Trinity
You see, the main reason why Man of Steel wasn't considered a dealbreaker within the minds of even the most upset fans was because it didn't mess up arguably the most important moment for a prospective DC Film Universe. The introduction of the Trinity. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are the paragons of the DC pantheon. These three will never be replaced. They are the iconic figures, the cornerstones of DC's empire. That has always been true, and it will always be true. Even Marvel doesn't have a proper comparison point. Their flagship character is Spider-Man, and beyond that they have a bunch of other teams that form the basis of their brand: the Avengers, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four. But none of them are considered the absolute main pillar.
As discussed above, The Avengers made the dream real with their round group shot, which visually communicated to the world that the age of the Marvel Universe was here. The only way DC could do that was with a shot of the Trinity.
In one of the Batman v Superman trailers, we finally saw this shot. The reveal of the Trinity, for the first time, on screen together. This was supposed to be the defining moment for all DC Films. And it didn't mean anything.
Why? Well, for one, it flew completely in the face of the film as marketed up to that point. By showing the team together like this, we already knew that the "Batman v Superman" conflict was superficial in a film called "Batman v Superman".
Secondly, within the context of the film, this moment is contrived so as to become painfully artificial. The reason for Superman and Batman setting aside their differences is divisive (at best), and Wonder Woman shows up because Batman sends her an email.
Unlike The Avengers, which was constructed from the ground up functionally and thematically to lead into the group shot, Batman v Superman has a flimsy foundation for uniting its three central characters. Superman hasn't even met Wonder Woman until now.
There was only ever going to be one first time for the Trinity being on screen. This moment was only ever going to be special once. This was the entire point of making a DC Film Universe. To unite the Trinity, so they could show us a new future for DC. And it didn't land.
Again, I know there are many people who love Batman v Superman, and if you do, that is great. If this moment worked for you, then I'm glad it did. The fact remains that given the critical and audience reception, it didn't work for many others.
The Avengers changed the cinematic landscape with the group shot. Batman v Superman didn't accomplish anything substantial with the Trinity shot. This was DC's big moment, and WB wanted it to be special. Deep down, they knew it wasn't. Now, WB was stuck with a divisive universe, where their most powerful visual moment had come and gone with little of the impact they needed it to have. They knew their lifelines were running thin. And the fans knew it too.
Factor #5) WB Holding All DC Film Rights
Most people who follow comic book news know that Marvel licensed out the film rights to many of their popular characters in the early 90's to save themselves from bankruptcy, and that it's prevented some characters from being part of the MCU.
The internet age and the shifting global information landscape changed the film industry by giving fans unprecedented access to information about ongoing productions. Suddenly, fans knew about film rights, marketing deals, and production issues. It's common knowledge now that the X-Men and the Fantastic Four are not allowed to appear in MCU films. Even the general audience is catching on. But DC doesn't have that problem.
Warner Brothers purchased DC outright, which means that all DC Films are released under a WB banner. Hypothetically speaking, the DCEU has unrestricted access to any DC character they want to use. It should be a fan's dream.
After The Avengers, companies that had Marvel film rights like Fox and Sony have tried to launch their own universes. Sony created The Amazing Spider-Man franchise, and Fox has expanded their catalogue of X-Men sequels and spin-offs. Some of these attempts have struggled. Sony had a whole slate of TASM films that bit the dust after TASM2. Fox tried to reboot Fantastic Four in 2015, which crashed and burned. The mainline X-Men films suffered a critical blow after X-Men: Apocalypse.
But then, something happened: Marvel started getting some of their toys back. Daredevil returned to Marvel in late 2012, and resurfaced on Marvel Netflix to critical acclaim. Marvel and Sony struck a deal to put Spider-Man in the MCU films. Even now, there are rumours that Disney is looking to reacquire the X-Men and Fantastic Four licenses from Fox, possibly by buying the whole company. Unintentionally or not, Marvel created a scenario where fans know that one day, the "Marvel" version of any character will appear. What this does, psychologically, is ensure that Marvel fans that the future of the MCU might see their favourites return to the fold. And it reminds DC fans that they don't have that luxury.
You see, DC fans know that the only alternative to the DCEU is the DC television shows, which aren't in continuity with the films. When it comes to the films, the DCEU is it. There is no other version, and there likely won't be for a long time.
If the DCEU makes a version of a character that fans don't like, or releases a film that poisons the overall brand of the universe, there's no going back. The DCEU can only continue forward, and it's too late to try again. The MCU has managed to avoid poisoning their brand with an unprecedented string of popular and successful films. They've turned less popular characters into icons. DC started with icons, and are struggling to keep up with the competition.
You can see that between Batman v Superman and Justice League that WB has demanded that their flagship characters be rewritten to try to placate to a wider audience, but the damage of continuity is still felt in subsequent films. The effect is that the mistakes made early on in the formation of the universe have a ripple effect on all future ones: an effect that WB is feeling right now after an incredibly disappointing domestic opening weekend for Justice League. But for the fans, it means they know that the DCEU is it. This is their one chance at a DC Film Universe within the foreseeable future. So excuses are made. Problems are handwaved. And they start getting defensive. In the end, for the dream, it's all going to be worth it, right?
Factor #6) Batman v Superman Reviews
Everything came to a head when the reviews for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice rolled in. After the mixed response to Man of Steel, Warner Brothers and DC fans figured they had it in the bag. This was going to be the big moment when it all came together.
And it didn't.
Batman v Superman was crushed by reviews, winding up with an abymsal 27% on RottenTomatoes, far worse than its predecessor. Reviews damned it as a disaster, citing issues with plot, characterization, editing, and a myriad of other problems. Naturally, fans were not pleased. A movie that tried to capture the philosophical heights of TDK was being trashed. The film that was supposed to fulfill the MCU's promise of a DC Film Universe was being hated. BVS was the second start for the DCEU after Man of Steel, and people are saying it's worse! It was the first movie with the Trinity, and people can't stand it? The only DC Film Universe we're going to get is failing right out of the gate? How could this be?! We waited years! We watched Marvel succeed for almost a decade! This cannot be!
And then, something snapped.
"They must be out to get DC. Look at these snide critics, thinking they know better than diehard fans. They don't know these characters! They saw this is a flawed Superman, or Batman? Well I know better! Look at all those high RottenTomatoes scores for MCU movies. They never have a bad film? Well, they're wrong! Iron Man 2 sucked! Thor 2 sucked! Ant-Man sucked! These critics don't know anything! I bet they're biased, or worse . . . . maybe Disney is paying them off? They think the movie is poorly written? Well I bet they're just stupid. No way they could understand a film as complex as this. I know, cause I understood The Dark Knight. That movie was deep. I bet Batman v Superman is just as deep. They're wrong! So what if critics say it's bad? The movie isn't for them! It's for the real fans, the ones who have waited years, decades even, for this movie. It's not a disappointment! It's the reward I deserve for being such a fan! This movie is only for true fans! Everyone wants DC to fail! Only I want DC to succeed! I'll show them! I'll prove it! If I can't convince them, I'll harass them! Tell them over and over how they're wrong! Nobody will take these movies from me. Nobody! Not the critics. Not Marvel. Not even WB, who keep stepping on Snyder's vision. The DCEU is mine, and mine alone. It's the universe I waited for!"
And in the end, after all the hatred, all the vitriol, all the harassment, all the death threats, and all the conspiracy theories, maybe it's the universe you deserve.
You claim that your hero, Superman, is a symbol of hope. Then why is it, for so many people when they think of DC fandom, they only feel fear?
Farewell, friends.
I hope you got something out of everything I said.
I thought Doctor Doom only spoke in the third person?
The stream of consciousness at the end sounds like the final pages of a super-villain origin story. We need to shop that onto panels of Lex Luthor losing his hair, or something.
Not a verified account so it is just one of his many Doombots :P
Black lives matter.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
+8
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
They've [Marvel] turned less popular characters into icons. DC started with icons, and are struggling to keep up with the competition.
This is a pretty good summation of the situation, and one that continues to boggle my mind. DC is just so bad at this.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
+4
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
I take solace in the fact that DC's comics are actually good again and Marvel's are 95% shit right now. It's utterly meaningless compared to the movie side of things but classy is classy.
Saw this last night because my wife insisted. It's watchable but ultimately a clunky mess. You really can tell which scenes were Snyder's and which were Whedon's.
I definitely appreciate the levity in the flick -- that new prologue was definitely needed, because otherwise we would have opened right into an extended dirge on the death of Superman -- but man, this isn't Whedon's best work. For every joke that lands (Aquaman sitting on the Batmobile) there's another one, maybe one and a half that reeks of flop sweat (the repeated "do you talk to fish" thing). Batman especially suffers through dialog that breaks his character. Which isn't to say Batman can't be funny:
....but man, Whedon dialog does NOT work with him.
Also, it's kind of fascinating to see how they tackled the "heroes give a shit about civilians" issue given the production weirdness:
It's pretty clear that Snyder didn't include any scenes of them saving civilians in the final battle. Whedon apparently wanted to, but the final battle is almost purely set on a CG background and it probably would have been really expensive to paste a bunch of people in. I'm guessing that's why we have "the extended adventures of a random Russian family," since that's an attempt to build the stakes and introduce a human element, so we can get a brief scene of Flash saving them. Okay, I guess. But then Flash's achievement gets deflated by a brief scene of Superman carrying an entire building (allegedly) full of people away. Which would have been a great gag if we had seen ANYONE ELSE in that city.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
Options
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
I take solace in the fact that DC's comics are actually good again and Marvel's are 95% shit right now. It's utterly meaningless compared to the movie side of things but classy is classy.
Idk what you're talking about. My pull list it mostly Marvel and is consistently great.
Oh dear god he actually did it as a Twitter thread, Harry I applaud your copy pasting to make that a less obnoxious read.
A shame that those who most need to listen to that advice are probably the least likely to take it to heart, but maybe someone will conduct a little introspection and realize that death threats over a comic book movie is an unwarranted respon... no I'm back to not thinking they'll listen there.
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Is it that out of the question to just stop going to see DC Movies? Well, from the box office weekend -- there is at least a segment of previous fans who have said "no, no its not."
Is it that out of the question to just stop going to see DC Movies? Well, from the box office weekend -- there is at least a segment of previous fans who have said "no, no its not."
This is the first one I haven't gone out to see. Suicide Squad was the first one I skipped IMAX for.
... I just realized I've actually seen 4 out of the 5 in theaters. To be fair, MoS started these shenanigans, and did have a rather rocking trailer (yes, trailers lie, we know).
SS I went in actively apprehensive of, and it managed to get under the bar anyway.
WW was good, if not great, and I'm glad I saw it.
JL thus ends up in kind of a funny place. If I'm honest and strive to be fairly impartial, I'd rank it fairly middle of the ground, maybe on the mid-high'ish range. Graded on a scale, while I think I may have liked WW overall a bit more, JL holds up fine for me, though I'm seeing it substantially below MoS on RT, and my mind just kind of blanks in response.
This post brought to you by acronyms!
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
The tease of a lantern was cool but it always feels like they're the least imaginative bunch in the movies: you can conjure objects based on imagination so you imagine a big hammer? A 5 year old kid would be a more formidable lantern.
That statement to me in a nutshell is the DCEU.
It was not awful, I'll give it that. It's fun in some places, really slow in others, and disjointed as a whole. DC really needs to get rid of Synder and let a more competent Director have a go at it.
Also, it's kind of fascinating to see how they tackled the "heroes give a shit about civilians" issue given the production weirdness:
It's pretty clear that Snyder didn't include any scenes of them saving civilians in the final battle. Whedon apparently wanted to, but the final battle is almost purely set on a CG background and it probably would have been really expensive to paste a bunch of people in. I'm guessing that's why we have "the extended adventures of a random Russian family," since that's an attempt to build the stakes and introduce a human element, so we can get a brief scene of Flash saving them. Okay, I guess. But then Flash's achievement gets deflated by a brief scene of Superman carrying an entire building (allegedly) full of people away. Which would have been a great gag if we had seen ANYONE ELSE in that city.
There was a shot of them running away where a bunch of other people are running away in the background. That was the first and only time I realized that they weren't the only ones there.
Also, it's kind of fascinating to see how they tackled the "heroes give a shit about civilians" issue given the production weirdness:
It's pretty clear that Snyder didn't include any scenes of them saving civilians in the final battle. Whedon apparently wanted to, but the final battle is almost purely set on a CG background and it probably would have been really expensive to paste a bunch of people in. I'm guessing that's why we have "the extended adventures of a random Russian family," since that's an attempt to build the stakes and introduce a human element, so we can get a brief scene of Flash saving them. Okay, I guess. But then Flash's achievement gets deflated by a brief scene of Superman carrying an entire building (allegedly) full of people away. Which would have been a great gag if we had seen ANYONE ELSE in that city.
There was a shot of them running away where a bunch of other people are running away in the background. That was the first and only time I realized that they weren't the only ones there.
Hah, I must have missed that since I was focused on Random Russian Family.
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
I do love that Snyder thought the shot of Doomsday surfing along the ground was such an awesome shot that he copy pasted it over to Justice League with Aquaman.
Well seeing how smooth wonder woman's legs look there...
and Aquaman's I assume.
0
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
whoever did the mustache removal really did drop the ball. I wasn't expecting it to be that constantly WTF, maybe missing on trying to connect emotion changes in Cavill but damn was it annoying, as fake as Captain America's integrity. I want to see how they did it because just taking duct tape and slapping it on and applying makeup over it would have been better.
I thought the uncanny valley of Rogue One wouldn't be beat so soon, but here we are.
+1
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
Bet it cost more than $22, too
They really should've gone with the beard n' black suit for most of the film. Then they could have put a lot more time into the intro and ending scenes where they'd need it.
Oh brilliant
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I wasn’t bothered by the lip at all.
And I looked for it because everyone made so much noise over it.
Peter Cushing was a billion times more obvious to me.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
+2
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
It was only seriously weird twice, I found
in the intro, the cell phone video with the kids.
And during the fight at the monument, especially when he picked up Batman and asked "do you bleed" - that was the standout moment that looked like a different person
So, analysts pegged Justice League to open domestically at $110 million. That would be just above the $103.3 million for Wonder Woman but below $133.7 for Suicide Squad, $166 for Batman v Superman, and $116.6 million for Man of Steel. For those of you keeping score, Avengers opened at $207.4 million and the latest Thor opened at $122.7 million.
Expect hilarious executive freakouts in the months ahead.
The numbers I've seen have it coming in at underperforming the underperformance. Under $94 million.
Obviously, they're going to spin it as "But look at the international box office!". Except we know that's garbage. The napkin math I've seen used most often is you count half the domestic, and a quarter of the international. So that's $94M/2 and $185M/4, or about $94M total. On a rumored $300M-$350M movie. Yeah, freakouts are going to be the least of the problem, with so many more movies on the schedule. Five in the next three years, and another 14 at some level of development.
The big number, I think, is what the drop-off next week is. The last three Marvel movies had ~55% dropoff from their opening weekend. By contrast, the last three DCEU movies went -70% (BvS), -65% (SS) and -42% (WW). Meaning the hype from the first two didn't compensate for the lack of quality, whereas WW's word of mouth buoyed it to the point it's the best performing retention of either DC OR Marvel (and only Iron Man 1 at -47.5% or Thor 1 at 47% came close).
It was also the third best domestic gross of the DC/Marvel movies, both Avengers take the top two spots, though Iron Man 3 and Cap America 3 are within ~1%. All despite having one of the smallest budgets across both franchises. At $149M, arguably only Ant Man had a smaller budget unadjusted at 2015's $130M, with Iron Man 1 at 2008's $140M, and Cap 1 at 2011's $140M likely being more after inflation.
It's almost like producing quality with a good director, instead of relying on hype, gets you more money in the long run. And that's (apparently) f'n weird.
Given the reviews of JL have been bad but not horrific, but the word of mouth from regular people is it's okay, it'll be interesting to see if the people once burnt, twice shy, will give it a shot this coming weekend. If not, given that this is THE tentpole movie for the DCEU, I can see heads rolling, and possibly major restructuring/cancellation of future projects. It's just not sustainable for a studio to keep doing this.
whoever did the mustache removal really did drop the ball. I wasn't expecting it to be that constantly WTF, maybe missing on trying to connect emotion changes in Cavill but damn was it annoying, as fake as Captain America's integrity. I want to see how they did it because just taking duct tape and slapping it on and applying makeup over it would have been better.
I thought the uncanny valley of Rogue One wouldn't be beat so soon, but here we are.
That reminds me, what did you think of Superman's characterization?
whoever did the mustache removal really did drop the ball. I wasn't expecting it to be that constantly WTF, maybe missing on trying to connect emotion changes in Cavill but damn was it annoying, as fake as Captain America's integrity. I want to see how they did it because just taking duct tape and slapping it on and applying makeup over it would have been better.
I thought the uncanny valley of Rogue One wouldn't be beat so soon, but here we are.
That reminds me, what did you think of Superman's characterization?
It was good. Outside of some forced humor at the end they got the reassuring dad vibe on him pretty good. I was expecting something truly epic like the end of Final Crisis #6 when he returned to help the team but this is a decent template to use going forward. Now they just need to establish a decent Clark Kent, which they have yet to do. But that's the flaw of casting a Brit, they won't know how to be a real American a boom a zing a pow.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
whoever did the mustache removal really did drop the ball. I wasn't expecting it to be that constantly WTF, maybe missing on trying to connect emotion changes in Cavill but damn was it annoying, as fake as Captain America's integrity. I want to see how they did it because just taking duct tape and slapping it on and applying makeup over it would have been better.
I thought the uncanny valley of Rogue One wouldn't be beat so soon, but here we are.
That reminds me, what did you think of Superman's characterization?
It was good. Outside of some forced humor at the end they got the reassuring dad vibe on him pretty good. I was expecting something truly epic like the end of Final Crisis #6 when he returned to help the team but this is a decent template to use going forward. Now they just need to establish a decent Clark Kent, which they have yet to do. But that's the flaw of casting a Brit, they won't know how to be a real American a boom a zing a pow.
+2
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
Nolan's Batman trilogy, moer leik Nolan's Britman Empire, m i rite? Smashed the wicket on that one I did.
+4
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
A Harley Quinn adult swim style animated series is coming to the DC Direct streaming service, made by the people who did the underrated Powerless show. And Robbie is interested in voicing Harley. Sounds interesting, and seems to really be hitting the Gotham City Sirens motif from the comics, with Harley done with Joker and hanging out with the other villains, notably Ivy. And the concept art looks interesting too:
whoever did the mustache removal really did drop the ball. I wasn't expecting it to be that constantly WTF, maybe missing on trying to connect emotion changes in Cavill but damn was it annoying, as fake as Captain America's integrity. I want to see how they did it because just taking duct tape and slapping it on and applying makeup over it would have been better.
I thought the uncanny valley of Rogue One wouldn't be beat so soon, but here we are.
That reminds me, what did you think of Superman's characterization?
It was good. Outside of some forced humor at the end they got the reassuring dad vibe on him pretty good. I was expecting something truly epic like the end of Final Crisis #6 when he returned to help the team but this is a decent template to use going forward. Now they just need to establish a decent Clark Kent, which they have yet to do. But that's the flaw of casting a Brit, they won't know how to be a real American a boom a zing a pow.
Is it that out of the question to just stop going to see DC Movies? Well, from the box office weekend -- there is at least a segment of previous fans who have said "no, no its not."
In a way, Wonder Woman hurt them, as a tuned in fan would know that Justice League is more of BvS, not more of WW. So people will be back for WW2 if they don't mess that up, but the "main" movies have shit the bed, possibly irreversibly.
They should have just kept Reynolds as Green Lantern and let his character lay low until JL or have him show up as a teaser in someone else's film. The movie may have bombed but they would have had an additional established character and they could have redeemed him in the ensemble movie and then literally jettison everything about the first movie in a post JL sequel.
With someone besides Snyder as the universe guy they could still have survived his Superman take too.
This universe is going to die a long slow death.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
+6
Options
Mego Thor"I say thee...NAY!"Registered Userregular
Aren’t they talking about this new GL movie being the Corps? Again? That’s the wrong approach.
Spend the first movie on and around Earth. Let the audience get to know and understand the concept. Tease the GLC at the end, so they think, “If one GL is this cool, an army of them will be fucking awesome!”
Aren’t they talking about this new GL movie being the Corps? Again? That’s the wrong approach.
Spend the first movie on and around Earth. Let the audience get to know and understand the concept. Tease the GLC at the end, so they think, “If one GL is this cool, an army of them will be fucking awesome!”
Bet you the use it to tie in cosmic DCEU and further hint and tie in Darkseid. Because, DC and WB have learned nothing.
I like the concept of the Corps for the movie actually.
"Space Cops" is an easy selling point.
Keeping it away from earth. Have it like Training Day, rookie Hal teamed up with more experienced Lantern (Stewart?). Explains why they're not on Earth when everything with Steppenwolf goes down.
Posts
Dr. Doom is a Latvarian dictator and enemy of the Fantastic Four
Toxicity exists in all fandoms, it's true. But why has the DCEU fandom become so infamous for this behaviour? Why do we see this again and again? I think there's something deeper going on; a set of social and psychological factors that melded together to create this problem. Specifically, I think there are six key factors that all led to a crisis point in DC fandom, which was the release of reviews for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. That was when this behaviour solidified and became a pervasive issue in our current film culture.
The key factors are:
1) The Success of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy
2) The Success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe
3) The Mixed Reception of Man of Steel
4) The First Cinematic Interpretation of the Trinity
5) WB Holding All DC Film Rights
6) Batman v Superman Reviews
I'm going to explore why these factors have affected the psychology of DC fandom, and why they all collided together to create the current state of DCEU fan culture post-BVS and now post-Justice League. With that, it's time to discuss . . . .
It Was Never Real: The Rise and Fall of the DC Extended Universe, and The People Who Supported It
Factor #1) The Success of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy
Back in 2005, the CBM landscape was radically different from where it was today. There was no notion of the "cinematic universe". Each CBM franchise was based on only one hero or team. Sequels were common, spin-offs were rare, and success stories were only now ramping up. At this time, the most successful running CBM franchise was Sam Raimi's then-in-progress Spider-Man Trilogy. Marvel had licensed out popular characters like X-Men, Fantastic Four and Daredevil, and films based on those properties were more common. DC films had mostly taken a back seat at this time, mostly because of Batman and Robin in 1998, which at the time was considered so bad that it may have "killed" the genre. While that was a ridiculous claim, it did dilute interest in DC films for several years.
That is, until Christopher Nolan decided to resurrect the Batman franchise with 2005's Batman Begins, which was a critical success and a fairly successful box office hit, adjusted for expectations at that time. It was a win for WB and DC as a whole.
There are a few reasons why Batman Begins did well. For one, it was really good. It came from a talented, visionary filmmaker, it was self-contained and did a good job telling its story, and it was a serious take on classic source material that struck a chord with fans. Batman was already considered the most profitable character in DC's pantheon by WB at the time. Superman had been taking a nearly two decade long break after Superman IV back in 1987, and Wonder Woman was nowhere to be found. But what really shocked WB was the sequel: 2008's The Dark Knight, which shattered all expectations with over a billion dollars at the box office, unprecedented critical acclaim, and the only Oscar-winning performance in a CBM.
There's no understating TDK's success. Every CBM that WB has made since TDK has been trying to replicate what made that film such a landmark achievement. But the fans have also been chasing the same high, for both the right and wrong reasons. TDK worked not because it was dark, but because it was exactly the movie it needed to be, uncompromised by studio interference or pandering to its intended audience. But it also gave fans something they took out of context: validation that their fandom was "adult fare".
TDK was at the Oscars. It was called a "crime drama" rather than a CBM. It aspired to something greater, which is good, but fans took this idea and ran it to an incorrect conclusion: that this type of CBM is inherently better than others, regardless of context. Suddenly, dark/gritty CBMs were an ideal in and of themselves for some fans, because TDK proved that comic books weren't "for kids", or whatever that means. It plays to the emotional immaturity in not being able to admit that superheroes are fun kids stuff at their core.
There's nothing wrong with CBMs that try to be deeper, that want to explore complex philosophical ideas. That's great for the genre. But having the superficial aspects of such a film, like a dark tone, or being more violent, or "realistic", are not inherently better. But DC fans were trained by the success of The Dark Knight films to regard one of their favourite characters as tied to that idea. Suddenly, DC films weren't "kiddie" fare like the Marvel movies. There were something more. They were something greater. Or so we thought.
Factor #2) The Success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe
"I'm here to talk to you about the Avengers Initiative".
With one line, Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury changed the cinematic landscape. For the first time, multiple superhero properties were going to collide on screen in the way that they had in comics for decades. Over four years, Marvel Studios slowly and successfully built their cinematic universe over six movies, and no one really knew how it was going to go. The individual films were mostly well regarded with critics and audiences, but The Avengers was a massive question mark.
That is, until The Avengers made $200 million domestically in its opening weekend. Every single studio in Hollywood stood up and took note. The game had changed. Now, everyone needed a cinematic universe. And so did DC. Outside of The Dark Knight trilogy, which ended the same year as The Avengers with The Dark Knight Rises, the DC film slate was mostly barren. Superman was getting a reboot with Man of Steel, but there wasn't much else since Green Lantern bombed the previous year.
Now there has always been Marvel vs. DC fandom rivalries. Hell, the companies themselves have played into it for sales with Marvel vs. DC crossover comics and the like. But I don't think DC fans were mad to see Marvel films succeed, at least at the time. But you see, with a film like The Avengers, everything changes. The Avengers made the dream of a full "shared universe" real. It wasn't enough anymore to have a Spider-Man movie, or a Captain America movie, or a Batman movie. Fans wanted to see their favourites share the screen.
And that entire dream was realized with one shot. You know the one:
That one shot crystallized that dream for Marvel fans around the globe. Of course DC fans wanted the same thing. How could you not? If The Avengers could be one of the biggest blockbusters of all time, surely the Justice League was next?
But here's the problem: there was no Justice League in development. There was a JL film in preproduction back in 2007, but it was scrapped. Now, all DC fans had to look forward to was next year's Man of Steel. It could be a start, sure, but would it live up to the hype?
We'll get to Man of Steel soon, but the wait for the DC Film Universe was going to be a long one. The MCU was four years old when Avengers dropped, and DC had question marks. TDK Trilogy was over. Would Christian Bale stay? Would they reboot Green Lantern? Where's Wonder Woman?
As the question marks piled up, Marvel kept rolling out success stories. Iron Man 3 made a billion dollars. Winter Soldier was a critical darling. Guardians of the Galaxy, a Z-list Marvel property, became a smash hit. The MCU kept winning, and DC fans had to wait year after year.
You see, while I do think there was some jealousy amongst DC fans that their preferred universe wasn't on the screen, I don't think they wanted Marvel to fail. They just wanted to see DC succeed too. But DC fans took something from the MCU that it never gave them: a promise. The promise that one day, they'd see the same success. That a DC Film Universe would show up to compliment Marvel's. But it was a promise that the MCU couldn't deliver. Only DC could do that.
Factor #3) The Mixed Reception to Man of Steel
I remember seeing this trailer for Man of Steel and being genuinely excited. The cinematography, the music, and the gravitas of it all. I still watch this trailer and get goosebumps.
This was the trailer that promised DC fans that their time was now.
Now, I know there are many people who unreservedly love Man of Steel, and that's great. I'm glad that they love the film, and there's nothing wrong with that. But the fact remains that the movie's overall reception was fairly divisive. Critics were split down the middle, and so were fans. Many loved it, many hated it, and the controversy surrounding Zack Snyder's take on Superman and the DC mythos was still being discussed until Batman v Superman's release.
What's important to remember is that Man of Steel wasn't just controversial within film culture, but within DC fandom itself. There are many Superman fans who felt that Man of Steel was a betrayal of the comic book character they loved. Many felt it was a bold, fresh take. Regardless of your personal feelings, Man of Steel was certainly not the start to the DCEU that WB wanted. They wanted an unmitigated success, and they thought they had replicated The Dark Knight's template to guarantee that.
You can plainly see the executive thinking at hand. Get a visionary filmmaker who can handle a comic book property, like TDK. Make it a darker and more violent version of a beloved character, like TDK. Use the character's more ominous sounding name for the title, like TDK. They let Zack Snyder do what he wanted with Man of Steel because they thought they had found the formula. Everything in Man of Steel is built for maximum gravitas, down to its orchestral musical score, its sweeping cinematography, the attempts to ground its hero in philosophy. But along the way, something fell apart. Man of Steel wasn't regarded as a masterpiece like TDK. It was called a fractured film, a movie that tried to say one thing but said something else. Warner Bros wanted to build a cinematic universe. Zack Snyder destroyed Metropolis.
Unlike the first Iron Man, which introduced the world to a wide universe they were excited to see more of, Man of Steel made audiences wary. Is this really the future for DC? Are these the movies that we're going to get? Are we sure this is the path we should go down?
Iron Man inspired confidence in Marvel's vision.
Man of Steel inspired trepidation in DC's.
But there still a reason to believe in the future. After all, Man of Steel was only one movie. The next one could bring it all together. At least, that was the hope.
Factor #4) The First Cinematic Interpretation of the Trinity
You see, the main reason why Man of Steel wasn't considered a dealbreaker within the minds of even the most upset fans was because it didn't mess up arguably the most important moment for a prospective DC Film Universe. The introduction of the Trinity. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are the paragons of the DC pantheon. These three will never be replaced. They are the iconic figures, the cornerstones of DC's empire. That has always been true, and it will always be true. Even Marvel doesn't have a proper comparison point. Their flagship character is Spider-Man, and beyond that they have a bunch of other teams that form the basis of their brand: the Avengers, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four. But none of them are considered the absolute main pillar.
As discussed above, The Avengers made the dream real with their round group shot, which visually communicated to the world that the age of the Marvel Universe was here. The only way DC could do that was with a shot of the Trinity.
In one of the Batman v Superman trailers, we finally saw this shot. The reveal of the Trinity, for the first time, on screen together. This was supposed to be the defining moment for all DC Films. And it didn't mean anything.
Why? Well, for one, it flew completely in the face of the film as marketed up to that point. By showing the team together like this, we already knew that the "Batman v Superman" conflict was superficial in a film called "Batman v Superman".
Secondly, within the context of the film, this moment is contrived so as to become painfully artificial. The reason for Superman and Batman setting aside their differences is divisive (at best), and Wonder Woman shows up because Batman sends her an email.
Unlike The Avengers, which was constructed from the ground up functionally and thematically to lead into the group shot, Batman v Superman has a flimsy foundation for uniting its three central characters. Superman hasn't even met Wonder Woman until now.
There was only ever going to be one first time for the Trinity being on screen. This moment was only ever going to be special once. This was the entire point of making a DC Film Universe. To unite the Trinity, so they could show us a new future for DC. And it didn't land.
Again, I know there are many people who love Batman v Superman, and if you do, that is great. If this moment worked for you, then I'm glad it did. The fact remains that given the critical and audience reception, it didn't work for many others.
The Avengers changed the cinematic landscape with the group shot. Batman v Superman didn't accomplish anything substantial with the Trinity shot. This was DC's big moment, and WB wanted it to be special. Deep down, they knew it wasn't. Now, WB was stuck with a divisive universe, where their most powerful visual moment had come and gone with little of the impact they needed it to have. They knew their lifelines were running thin. And the fans knew it too.
Factor #5) WB Holding All DC Film Rights
Most people who follow comic book news know that Marvel licensed out the film rights to many of their popular characters in the early 90's to save themselves from bankruptcy, and that it's prevented some characters from being part of the MCU.
The internet age and the shifting global information landscape changed the film industry by giving fans unprecedented access to information about ongoing productions. Suddenly, fans knew about film rights, marketing deals, and production issues. It's common knowledge now that the X-Men and the Fantastic Four are not allowed to appear in MCU films. Even the general audience is catching on. But DC doesn't have that problem.
Warner Brothers purchased DC outright, which means that all DC Films are released under a WB banner. Hypothetically speaking, the DCEU has unrestricted access to any DC character they want to use. It should be a fan's dream.
After The Avengers, companies that had Marvel film rights like Fox and Sony have tried to launch their own universes. Sony created The Amazing Spider-Man franchise, and Fox has expanded their catalogue of X-Men sequels and spin-offs. Some of these attempts have struggled. Sony had a whole slate of TASM films that bit the dust after TASM2. Fox tried to reboot Fantastic Four in 2015, which crashed and burned. The mainline X-Men films suffered a critical blow after X-Men: Apocalypse.
But then, something happened: Marvel started getting some of their toys back. Daredevil returned to Marvel in late 2012, and resurfaced on Marvel Netflix to critical acclaim. Marvel and Sony struck a deal to put Spider-Man in the MCU films. Even now, there are rumours that Disney is looking to reacquire the X-Men and Fantastic Four licenses from Fox, possibly by buying the whole company. Unintentionally or not, Marvel created a scenario where fans know that one day, the "Marvel" version of any character will appear. What this does, psychologically, is ensure that Marvel fans that the future of the MCU might see their favourites return to the fold. And it reminds DC fans that they don't have that luxury.
You see, DC fans know that the only alternative to the DCEU is the DC television shows, which aren't in continuity with the films. When it comes to the films, the DCEU is it. There is no other version, and there likely won't be for a long time.
If the DCEU makes a version of a character that fans don't like, or releases a film that poisons the overall brand of the universe, there's no going back. The DCEU can only continue forward, and it's too late to try again. The MCU has managed to avoid poisoning their brand with an unprecedented string of popular and successful films. They've turned less popular characters into icons. DC started with icons, and are struggling to keep up with the competition.
You can see that between Batman v Superman and Justice League that WB has demanded that their flagship characters be rewritten to try to placate to a wider audience, but the damage of continuity is still felt in subsequent films. The effect is that the mistakes made early on in the formation of the universe have a ripple effect on all future ones: an effect that WB is feeling right now after an incredibly disappointing domestic opening weekend for Justice League. But for the fans, it means they know that the DCEU is it. This is their one chance at a DC Film Universe within the foreseeable future. So excuses are made. Problems are handwaved. And they start getting defensive. In the end, for the dream, it's all going to be worth it, right?
Factor #6) Batman v Superman Reviews
Everything came to a head when the reviews for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice rolled in. After the mixed response to Man of Steel, Warner Brothers and DC fans figured they had it in the bag. This was going to be the big moment when it all came together.
And it didn't.
Batman v Superman was crushed by reviews, winding up with an abymsal 27% on RottenTomatoes, far worse than its predecessor. Reviews damned it as a disaster, citing issues with plot, characterization, editing, and a myriad of other problems. Naturally, fans were not pleased. A movie that tried to capture the philosophical heights of TDK was being trashed. The film that was supposed to fulfill the MCU's promise of a DC Film Universe was being hated. BVS was the second start for the DCEU after Man of Steel, and people are saying it's worse! It was the first movie with the Trinity, and people can't stand it? The only DC Film Universe we're going to get is failing right out of the gate? How could this be?! We waited years! We watched Marvel succeed for almost a decade! This cannot be!
And then, something snapped.
"They must be out to get DC. Look at these snide critics, thinking they know better than diehard fans. They don't know these characters! They saw this is a flawed Superman, or Batman? Well I know better! Look at all those high RottenTomatoes scores for MCU movies. They never have a bad film? Well, they're wrong! Iron Man 2 sucked! Thor 2 sucked! Ant-Man sucked! These critics don't know anything! I bet they're biased, or worse . . . . maybe Disney is paying them off? They think the movie is poorly written? Well I bet they're just stupid. No way they could understand a film as complex as this. I know, cause I understood The Dark Knight. That movie was deep. I bet Batman v Superman is just as deep. They're wrong! So what if critics say it's bad? The movie isn't for them! It's for the real fans, the ones who have waited years, decades even, for this movie. It's not a disappointment! It's the reward I deserve for being such a fan! This movie is only for true fans! Everyone wants DC to fail! Only I want DC to succeed! I'll show them! I'll prove it! If I can't convince them, I'll harass them! Tell them over and over how they're wrong! Nobody will take these movies from me. Nobody! Not the critics. Not Marvel. Not even WB, who keep stepping on Snyder's vision. The DCEU is mine, and mine alone. It's the universe I waited for!"
And in the end, after all the hatred, all the vitriol, all the harassment, all the death threats, and all the conspiracy theories, maybe it's the universe you deserve.
You claim that your hero, Superman, is a symbol of hope. Then why is it, for so many people when they think of DC fandom, they only feel fear?
Farewell, friends.
I hope you got something out of everything I said.
The stream of consciousness at the end sounds like the final pages of a super-villain origin story. We need to shop that onto panels of Lex Luthor losing his hair, or something.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
I definitely appreciate the levity in the flick -- that new prologue was definitely needed, because otherwise we would have opened right into an extended dirge on the death of Superman -- but man, this isn't Whedon's best work. For every joke that lands (Aquaman sitting on the Batmobile) there's another one, maybe one and a half that reeks of flop sweat (the repeated "do you talk to fish" thing). Batman especially suffers through dialog that breaks his character. Which isn't to say Batman can't be funny:
....but man, Whedon dialog does NOT work with him.
Also, it's kind of fascinating to see how they tackled the "heroes give a shit about civilians" issue given the production weirdness:
Idk what you're talking about. My pull list it mostly Marvel and is consistently great.
A shame that those who most need to listen to that advice are probably the least likely to take it to heart, but maybe someone will conduct a little introspection and realize that death threats over a comic book movie is an unwarranted respon... no I'm back to not thinking they'll listen there.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
This is the first one I haven't gone out to see. Suicide Squad was the first one I skipped IMAX for.
SS I went in actively apprehensive of, and it managed to get under the bar anyway.
WW was good, if not great, and I'm glad I saw it.
JL thus ends up in kind of a funny place. If I'm honest and strive to be fairly impartial, I'd rank it fairly middle of the ground, maybe on the mid-high'ish range. Graded on a scale, while I think I may have liked WW overall a bit more, JL holds up fine for me, though I'm seeing it substantially below MoS on RT, and my mind just kind of blanks in response.
This post brought to you by acronyms!
I feel I made the right choice.
That statement to me in a nutshell is the DCEU.
It was not awful, I'll give it that. It's fun in some places, really slow in others, and disjointed as a whole. DC really needs to get rid of Synder and let a more competent Director have a go at it.
There was a shot of them running away where a bunch of other people are running away in the background. That was the first and only time I realized that they weren't the only ones there.
Hah, I must have missed that since I was focused on Random Russian Family.
It is a terrible shot that is now in two movies!
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Well, you see he chose the Aquaman role to display his great range as a actor.
mmm
pleasepaypreacher.net
and Aquaman's I assume.
I thought the uncanny valley of Rogue One wouldn't be beat so soon, but here we are.
They really should've gone with the beard n' black suit for most of the film. Then they could have put a lot more time into the intro and ending scenes where they'd need it.
And I looked for it because everyone made so much noise over it.
Peter Cushing was a billion times more obvious to me.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
And during the fight at the monument, especially when he picked up Batman and asked "do you bleed" - that was the standout moment that looked like a different person
Obviously, they're going to spin it as "But look at the international box office!". Except we know that's garbage. The napkin math I've seen used most often is you count half the domestic, and a quarter of the international. So that's $94M/2 and $185M/4, or about $94M total. On a rumored $300M-$350M movie. Yeah, freakouts are going to be the least of the problem, with so many more movies on the schedule. Five in the next three years, and another 14 at some level of development.
The big number, I think, is what the drop-off next week is. The last three Marvel movies had ~55% dropoff from their opening weekend. By contrast, the last three DCEU movies went -70% (BvS), -65% (SS) and -42% (WW). Meaning the hype from the first two didn't compensate for the lack of quality, whereas WW's word of mouth buoyed it to the point it's the best performing retention of either DC OR Marvel (and only Iron Man 1 at -47.5% or Thor 1 at 47% came close).
It was also the third best domestic gross of the DC/Marvel movies, both Avengers take the top two spots, though Iron Man 3 and Cap America 3 are within ~1%. All despite having one of the smallest budgets across both franchises. At $149M, arguably only Ant Man had a smaller budget unadjusted at 2015's $130M, with Iron Man 1 at 2008's $140M, and Cap 1 at 2011's $140M likely being more after inflation.
It's almost like producing quality with a good director, instead of relying on hype, gets you more money in the long run. And that's (apparently) f'n weird.
Given the reviews of JL have been bad but not horrific, but the word of mouth from regular people is it's okay, it'll be interesting to see if the people once burnt, twice shy, will give it a shot this coming weekend. If not, given that this is THE tentpole movie for the DCEU, I can see heads rolling, and possibly major restructuring/cancellation of future projects. It's just not sustainable for a studio to keep doing this.
That reminds me, what did you think of Superman's characterization?
1) Wonder Woman
2) Justice League
3) Man of Steel
4) Suicide Squad
5) Batman vs Superman
It was good. Outside of some forced humor at the end they got the reassuring dad vibe on him pretty good. I was expecting something truly epic like the end of Final Crisis #6 when he returned to help the team but this is a decent template to use going forward. Now they just need to establish a decent Clark Kent, which they have yet to do. But that's the flaw of casting a Brit, they won't know how to be a real American a boom a zing a pow.
He’s not a Brit, he’s a Durlan.
In a way, Wonder Woman hurt them, as a tuned in fan would know that Justice League is more of BvS, not more of WW. So people will be back for WW2 if they don't mess that up, but the "main" movies have shit the bed, possibly irreversibly.
With someone besides Snyder as the universe guy they could still have survived his Superman take too.
This universe is going to die a long slow death.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Spend the first movie on and around Earth. Let the audience get to know and understand the concept. Tease the GLC at the end, so they think, “If one GL is this cool, an army of them will be fucking awesome!”
Bet you the use it to tie in cosmic DCEU and further hint and tie in Darkseid. Because, DC and WB have learned nothing.
"Space Cops" is an easy selling point.
Keeping it away from earth. Have it like Training Day, rookie Hal teamed up with more experienced Lantern (Stewart?). Explains why they're not on Earth when everything with Steppenwolf goes down.