OFFICIAL DC Studios; "DCU" THREAD

[Monker]

Thou art the Nerd of Nerds. Thou art LORD of All Nerds. Your Full Frontal Nerdity is unparalleled.

Your post is SO silly and SO nitpicky and SO anal, I won't go near it, except for this tidbit.

LOL...you are saying this in a COMIC BOOK movie thread where you have gone on rants on the history of various characters in the comics, how the movies did not exactly follow the story in the books and detailed the differences, the entire history of how DC actually had the idea for a comic book universe long before Marvel, and on and on and on. Calling someone nerdy, or whatever, in a thread like this is pretty hilarious, and you projecting yourself on others.

I will not be shocked if he does, and that is exactly, precisely, why he should not have been made showrunner at WB/DC.

And, as I have said, you were not complaining about Gunn in the beginning. In fact, you were glad Hamada was gone and Gunn was replacing him. It was not until he purged the Snyder cast that you rebelled. You have NO IDEA how well Gunn's movies will be...you have not seen any yet. In fact, I would not even call "Blue Beetle" a Gunnverse movie...regardless of what he says. You will not see how the Gunnverse is until after Aquaman 2.

As for doing a Star-Lord solo move, so what. I doubt very much that it would affect DC. You just view Marvel as "the enemy". I think you lose sight that it should be about making and seeing good movies. if he makes a good Superman movie, then what are you going to say? If Fillion is in every MCU movie...but they are all good movies, then what? Are you still going to go on about Gunn and Fillion?

Gunn does two successful Guardians movies...gets fired by Marvel. Goes to DC and does The Suicide Squad and the Peacekeeper series. Then he goes back to Marvel and does the GotG Holiday Special and Guardians 3...both are awesome, IMO. And, he takes over DC. So, now he MAY do another Marvel movie...as he does the new Superman. Seems to me that he has backup plans for backup plans. Smart guy.

[verslibre]

LOL...you are saying this in a COMIC BOOK movie thread where you have gone on rants on the history of various characters in the comics, how the movies did not exactly follow the story in the books and detailed the differences, the entire history of how DC actually had the idea for a comic book universe long before Marvel, and on and on and on.

Damned straight.

Calling someone nerdy, or whatever, in a thread like this is pretty hilarious, and you projecting yourself on others.

You ask for it when you say "nobody cares" what the film iterations of the IPs are like compared to their origins. Take that!

In fact, you were glad Hamada was gone and Gunn was replacing him.

More accurately, we were just glad Hamada was out of there because he started out alright but then got some wild hairs up the derriere about what he thought the "Trinity" onscreen should be: Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Batgirl (Leslie Grace), and Supergirl (Sasha Calle). No Superman or Batman. While Batgirl and Supergirl are no doubt integral to the Batman Family and Superman Family, respectively, neither comprises the 33.33% of the DC Trinity. That will always be Wonder Woman, Superman, Batman.

Moving right along...

It was not until he purged the Snyder cast that you rebelled.

The studio lied to us. They proceed to shart out one lie after another. Cavill was back. He announced it. The studio announced it. And then it turned out to be complete bullshit because they just wanted to sell tickets to Black Adam (which didn't do that badly as some people think, considering it didn't screen in China). Meanwhile, Gunn does the egghsell dance saying he didn't "fire Cavill/Gadot/Affleck," but that they don't factor into his plans and that's why they're not showing up in anything and that's why Batman's scenes from Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom got cut, and it had a third round of reshoots, and Patty's out because Gunn didn't like her script for Wonder Woman 3, ad nauseum. They love to keep moving goalposts and tossing the blame hat around to each other. The Abdy/De Luca team was all set to keep the DCEU rolling till something happened. (They're still WB's film chiefs but now have other responsibilities.) People got excited Henry was back. The Rock fought WB's leadership's shenanigans for years. They didn't want him to be Black Adam anymore. He resisted. They asked him if he'd like to portray "any other" character. He said no. That's why it took years for the movie to get made. There are too many cooks in WB's kitchen.

Many things have come to light since then: Gunn is there because of his pal, Safran. But Gunn is also there because nobody else wanted the gig because of the constant friction and lack of consistency and trust. It's like every director sees an arbitrary post-edit of their final cut and can't do anything about it. It happened to Snyder, Ayer and Jenkins and it's now happened to Wan — who says he has "no idea which cut" of Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom audiences will get at this stage.

Zaslav just wants bucks. He doesn't care about film. He doesn't care about art. He doesn't care about releasing a quality product. He just wants to see the numbers going up, up (and away!) in the ledgers. He collects an obscenely large salary and reputedly doesn't care about actors, directors, story, continuity, etc. He just wants more "content." I hope Universal buys WB from Discovery.

Oh, and Gunn has had his fingers in the stew since before his installment was officially announced. The Flash and now Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom will come to light as films that minimally resemble what we were supposed to get. James Wan is being diplomatic (for now), but his frustration is palpable. The film wasn't supposed to be an action-comedy à la The Flash. That's hugely disappointing after an epic first film.

You have NO IDEA how well Gunn's movies will be...you have not seen any yet. In fact, I would not even call "Blue Beetle" a Gunnverse movie...regardless of what he says. You will not see how the Gunnverse is until after Aquaman 2.

Did it ever occur to you, while you were dropping that little triangular chunk of Ex-lax into your morning brew, that you really don't need to go so far out of your way to defend Gunn? I mean, are you or are you not in the man's pocket? For a guy who's enjoyed dunking on DC films so hard in the past, you inject the same fervor into propping up the people you think are cool.

NERD!

You just view Marvel as "the enemy".

Utter nonsense. A byproduct of the white noise constantly reverberating between your ears and orbs.

If he makes a good Superman movie, then what are you going to say?

Tra-el and myself will both concur that Gunn defied expectations and made a "good Superman movie."

à laIf Fillion is in every MCU movie...but they are all good movies, then what? Are you still going to go on about Gunn and Fillion?

Man, do you have Fillion's mug tattooed on your sack? Don't scare the guy at one of the SF cons you go to.

Gunn does two successful Guardians movies...gets fired by Marvel. Goes to DC and does The Suicide Squad and the Peacekeeper series. Then he goes back to Marvel and does the GotG Holiday Special and Guardians 3...both are awesome, IMO. And, he takes over DC. So, now he MAY do another Marvel movie...as he does the new Superman. Seems to me that he has backup plans for backup plans. Smart guy.

Of course, he's "smart." He's banking it as long as somebody thinks he's bankable. He almost sunk his own ship with those disgusting tweets of his. Make no mistake, the guy is warped.

Once again, you demonstrate that your definition of quality is based on receipts. GOTG was a very good movie but GOTGV2 was a gilded turd. The Suicide Squad is only marginally better (but the writing still left much to be desired). I haven't seen GOTGV3 and I'm in no rush.

[Monker]

LOL...you are saying this in a COMIC BOOK movie thread where you have gone on rants on the history of various characters in the comics, how the movies did not exactly follow the story in the books and detailed the differences, the entire history of how DC actually had the idea for a comic book universe long before Marvel, and on and on and on.

Damned straight.

So, you can do with comic books exactly what I can do with scifi. So, who's more nerdy, the nerd or the one who calls others a nerd in a nerd filled topic?

Calling someone nerdy, or whatever, in a thread like this is pretty hilarious, and you projecting yourself on others.

You ask for it when you say "nobody cares" what the film iterations of the IPs are like compared to their origins. Take that!

It's irrelevant. A good writer writes for his media and his audience. A comic book is a different audience and a different media than film. So, doing a 1 to 1 copy is basically a stupid idea. Look at "Lord of the Rings"...widely regarded as one of the best film adaptations of a novel...and the reality is that it barely followed the source material at all. Marvel did it right by using the comic books as source for inspiration of ideas but fitting them into a movie that does what the MCU wants or needs. Also, the fact is that comic book fans are by far a minority in the audience of a successful comic book movie.

More accurately, we were just glad Hamada was out of there because he started out alright but then got some wild hairs up the derriere about what he thought the "Trinity" onscreen should be: Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Batgirl (Leslie Grace), and Supergirl (Sasha Calle). No Superman or Batman. While Batgirl and Supergirl are no doubt integral to the Batman Family and Superman Family, respectively, neither comprises the 33.33% of the DC Trinity. That will always be Wonder Woman, Superman, Batman.

More accurately yet, reread the first page of this thread.

I also constantly poked fun at Hamada's vision of the future, in the other thread, back when he was in charge. Funny that you agree with me now but not back then, when it mattered.

It was not until he purged the Snyder cast that you rebelled.

The studio lied to us.

Oh, please, you believed what you wanted to believe. Even recently, you STILL look for any sign for a return of Snyderville...because you WANT it to happen.

It was very, very, very obvious that MOS2, BA2, BAvSM, etc., were never going to happen, after BA's first week. BA had a budget of $200million and grossed $400million when you add promotion and other expenses, it barely made anything in theaters. This was supposed to be a big hit, it wasn't. It wasn't despite the Rock's promotion. It wasn't despite a cameo by Cavill. It wasn't despite all of the crap coming otu of Dwayne's mouth. BA *PROVED* that Dwayne was not all it took to make a movie a hit for the DCEU. BA *PROVED* that Cavill alone did not bring in very many fans and could not make a movie a big hit. BA PROVED that BA combined with Superman combined with Rock combined with Cavill did not make money. All of this at a time when WB *NEEDS* cash to pay debt. There was no way in Hell that Dwayne and Cavill's vision of MOS2, BA2, BAvSM was ever going to happen. It was very, very obvious. "People" may have been excited...but the few thousand of vocal internet fans are not enough to justify keeping him around.

Gunn didn't like the script for WW3. You are kidding yourself if you think that is the only reasoning for Gal and Jenkins getting kicked to the curb. WW84 *SUCKED* and is barely watchable. Gal and Jenkins are NOT this magical pair that release billion dollar films. It happened ONCE but it became obvious that they must have had a LOT of help with that debut film.

Cutting Afleck, Gal, and Cavill from the recent films only makes sense since they are no longer part of the new DCU. It would be STUPID to keep their cameos. In fact, it was a STUPID idea to release Flash...and you should be thankful you had a final farewell.

You're right, Gunn should have publicly said that the Snyder cast was fired...because it still gives Snyder fans hope and they look for ANY reason to say the Snyderverse will continue.

It's like every director sees an arbitrary post-edit of their final cut and can't do anything about it. It happened to Snyder, Ayer and Jenkins and it's now happened to Wan — who says he has "no idea which cut" of Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom audiences will get at this stage.

So what. Nothing could have saved WW84 or BA. The "Snyder Cut" of Justice League was not THAT much better. The Ayer cut of Suicide Squad is probably no different. Aquaman 2 isn't released yet...so you can't judge that. Also, Marvel has ALWAYS meddled and had reshoots. As I said, when Feige backed off some, you got screaming goats.

Zaslav just wants bucks.

Duh. WB *NEEDS* $'s. They need billion dollar films, not less than mediocre fillers. With a few exception, all DCEU/DCU films lately have been less than mediocre fillers.

Oh, and Gunn has had his fingers in the stew since before his installment was officially announced. The Flash and now Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom will come to light as films that minimally resemble what we were supposed to get.

The Flash should have never been released. It went through a few iterations of what it was supposed to do and set up. What was Gunn supposed to do? Allow Keaton to be setup as Batman and allow Supergirl to replace Cavill? The entire movie failed to have a purpose.

You have NO IDEA how well Gunn's movies will be...you have not seen any yet. In fact, I would not even call "Blue Beetle" a Gunnverse movie...regardless of what he says. You will not see how the Gunnverse is until after Aquaman 2.

Did it ever occur to you, while you were dropping that little triangular chunk of Ex-lax into your morning brew, that you really don't need to go so far out of your way to defend Gunn? I mean, are you or are you not in the man's pocket?

Did it ever occur to you that I'm not judging the DCU until the DCU actually starts releasing movies...and I can't judge Gunn in the DCU until that happens.

For a guy who's enjoyed dunking on DC films so hard in the past, you inject the same fervor into propping up the people you think are cool.

I don't think he's cool. I think he' is simply the next DC thing and he did the right thing by wiping most of the past from the table. Also, if Aquaman 2 fails as bad as BA, Shazam, and Flash, I doubt Momoa will be doing another Aquaman movie...and justifiably so.

If he makes a good Superman movie, then what are you going to say?

Tra-el and myself will both concur that Gunn defied expectations and made a "good Superman movie."

I doubt it. I think you'll compare it to MOS and dream about what could have been...especially if it does not make a billion.

à laIf Fillion is in every MCU movie...but they are all good movies, then what? Are you still going to go on about Gunn and Fillion?

Man, do you have Fillion's mug tattooed on your sack? Don't scare the guy at one of the SF cons you go to.

Never been to a convention of any type. Have no desire to. Not Comic Con, not E3, not Dragon Con. I like the stories, not the fanville.

Of course, he's "smart." He's banking it as long as somebody thinks he's bankable. He almost sunk his own ship with those disgusting tweets of his. Make no mistake, the guy is warped.

Don't care.

Once again, you demonstrate that your definition of quality is based on receipts.

I did not define "quality". I said they were successful. They were - all three GotG movies were

GOTG was a very good movie but GOTGV2 was a gilded turd.

I disagree. And, you are stating that as a fact. It's not, it's just your opinion. Loved GotG3, and the Holiday special. Awesome.

The Suicide Squad is only marginally better (but the writing still left much to be desired).

Meh. It's not that much better than the original. The original had a video game type intro that was a complete waste of the first thirty minutes. The Gunn version stormed the beach to demonstrate why it's rated R and that most of the characters you just met mean nothing...another waste of 30minutes. I lost interest and stopped watching not much further into it.

[verslibre]

So, you can do with comic books exactly what I can do with scifi. So, who's more nerdy, the nerd or the one who calls others a nerd in a nerd filled topic?

You ask for it when you say "nobody cares" what the film iterations of the IPs are like compared to their origins. Take that!

It's irrelevant. A good writer writes for his media and his audience. A comic book is a different audience and a different media than film. So, doing a 1 to 1 copy is basically a stupid idea. Look at "Lord of the Rings"...widely regarded as one of the best film adaptations of a novel...and the reality is that it barely followed the source material at all. Marvel did it right by using the comic books as source for inspiration of ideas but fitting them into a movie that does what the MCU wants or needs.

Of course it's relevant. Take off the blinders. Why aren't the origins of Superman in Superman (1978) and Man of Steel (2013) identical? Why aren't the origins of Batman in Batman (1989) and Batman Begins (2005) identical? Because the latter films are based on reboots in the comics published in different decades. Are you saying nobody noticed? Frank Miller's reimagining of Batman for Batman: Year One (a four-issue event, mind you) is what Nolan sourced for his film because it's a far more modern, more interesting take. In fact, some panels/images were translated faithfully and very successfully from David Mazzucchelli's art to film. Zack Snyder's adaptation of Watchmen is a sequentially faithful rendition and it's amazing. Your saying “it's a stupid idea” is just (wait for it) YOUR opinion!

Re: Tolkien's Ring saga: It uses the source material, but not all of it. So, "barely" is like, way off. The Hobbit is a smooth read but the main books are cumbersome and laden with all manner of peripheral details that could grind any filmic adaptation to a halt. That's why Jackson streamlined the narrative, merged arcs, deleted characters and sequences and even downsized the topography of the realms so he wouldn't lose Average Joe Viewer. If Tolkien wrote those books today, they'd be wildly different. His penchant for encyclopedic detail remains a common complaint. But Jackson didn't emerge unscathed. Some fans think he should have kept some elements. It is what it is.

Also, the fact is that comic book fans are by far a minority in the audience of a successful comic book movie.

They're not the majority but their numbers are greater than you guesstimate, i.e., not the “5%” you probably imagine it is.

More accurately, we were just glad Hamada was out of there because he started out alright but then got some wild hairs up the derriere about what he thought the "Trinity" onscreen should be: Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Batgirl (Leslie Grace), and Supergirl (Sasha Calle). No Superman or Batman. While Batgirl and Supergirl are no doubt integral to the Batman Family and Superman Family, respectively, neither comprises the 33.33% of the DC Trinity. That will always be Wonder Woman, Superman, Batman.

More accurately yet, reread the first page of this thread.

I also constantly poked fun at Hamada's vision of the future, in the other thread, back when he was in charge.

You did it because you like to dunk on DC. His intentions were made clear later.

Funny that you agree with me now but not back then, when it mattered.

Better yet, why don't you reread the first sentence of the paragraph you're responding too? You know, the part that goes “...he started out alright but then got some wild hairs...”?

Your movement of goalposts is a silly needless tactic that won't help your argument (any of them). Your opinion is your opinion, nothing more/less, and it no bears no additional weight in any context. Things change. You know, like your most favoritest band in the world changing lead singers like underwear.

The studio lied to us.

Oh, please, you believed what you wanted to believe. Even recently, you STILL look for any sign for a return of Snyderville...because you WANT it to happen.

Try to keep up. No, the studio full-on bs'd everybody. Purposely. Do you actively avoid the trades and social media? That could explain your ignorance.

It was very, very, very obvious that MOS2, BA2, BAvSM, etc., were never going to happen, after BA's first week. {Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...listen to me type.}

Try to keep up. Pam Abdy and Mike De Luca were brought in as WB's film chiefs after MGM released them. Under their helm, the new post-Aquaman and the Hidden Kingdom slate was to be

Man of Steel 2 — starring Henry Cavill and Sasha Calle (the villain was going to be Brainiac);

Ben Affleck's Batman film, which reportedly has a tremendous script penned by Ben himself, in which the Dark Knight squares off against Deathstroke (Joe Manganiello);

Batman Beyond —starring Michael Keaton;

Superman v Black Adam;

Justice League Part 2 — directed by Zack Snyder.

Instead, Safran convinced Zaslav to bring in his friend James Gunn, who proceeds to develop a new, completely different slate that “costs less” or whatever. But therein lies the danger: How much buzz will it generate, if any? The Suicide Squad flatlined upon release. Nobody talks about it.

Gunn didn't like the script for WW3. You are kidding yourself if you think that is the only reasoning for Gal and Jenkins getting kicked to the curb. WW84 *SUCKED* and is barely watchable.

Wonder Woman 1984's narrative gets strange but visually it's just fine. Had the movie been released pre-pandemic as originally planned, it would've made money. “Barely watchable” is a patently Monker exaggeration. Go look at Black Widow and Ant-Man: Quantumania for forgettable, barely-watchable fare. Black Widow made less money than Black Adam when it should've earned 600 million without China.

Gal and Jenkins are NOT this magical pair that release billion dollar films. It happened ONCE but it became obvious that they must have had a LOT of help with that debut film.

That's your assumption — nothing more, nothing less.

Cutting Afleck, Gal, and Cavill from the recent films only makes sense since they are no longer part of the new DCU. It would be STUPID to keep their cameos.

Is your caps lock on? Yes, they're cutting scenes and ordering reshoots because of Gunn, which is more money out the window. WB is good at that. (See: Joss.) The Flash and Aquaman 2 having three or four different versions means more money is wasted because one guy pulled the rug out. Aquaman 2, a sequel to a billion dollar movie, could be doomed. You really think that's smart, huh? Un-fucking-believable.

So what. Nothing could have saved WW84 or BA.

Black Adam is a good movie. What could've “saved” WW84 was not letting Geoff Johns submit a treatment.

The "Snyder Cut" of Justice League was not THAT much better.

That's your opinion. The fact is, ZSJL whups Josstice League's ass up and down the pavement.

The Ayer cut of Suicide Squad is probably no different.

Invalid remark. Hypothetical. You've not seen it. It contains additional footage and a different ending.

Aquaman 2 isn't released yet...so you can't judge that.

But James Wan, its director, CAN. His remarks far outweight yours, keyboard warrior.

Also, Marvel has ALWAYS meddled and had reshoots. As I said, when Feige backed off some, you got screaming goats.

Irrelevant. Isolated example.

Zaslav just wants bucks.

Duh. WB *NEEDS* $'s. They need billion dollar films, not less than mediocre fillers. With a few exception, all DCEU/DCU films lately have been less than mediocre fillers.

More reason to not have fucked with the slate. It's anyone's guess what Gunn's slate (if it even happens) will earn. I hope Universal buys WB and installs Nolan as DC showrunner (or he reinstalls Abdy & De Luca).

The Flash should have never been released. It went through a few iterations of what it was supposed to do and set up. What was Gunn supposed to do? Allow Keaton to be setup as Batman and allow Supergirl to replace Cavill? The entire movie failed to have a purpose.

It's not what's he supposed to do, it's what he did: grab a huge eraser and start erasing.

Also, if Aquaman 2 fails as bad as BA, Shazam, and Flash, I doubt Momoa will be doing another Aquaman movie...and justifiably so.

And why should a sequel to a buzz-intensive billion dollar-earning origin CBM fail? Because its director was not allowed to fulfill his vision. Why you continually fail to see what's going on is beyond me. You're in a bubble, and I bet it smells like stale farts in there.

Tra-el and myself will both concur that Gunn defied expectations and made a "good Superman movie."

I doubt it. I think you'll compare it to MOS and dream about what could have been...especially if it does not make a billion.

Yet another assumption. Rest assured, if buzz is low, it won't earn a billion, unless WB fudges the ledgers the way Disney did for Captain Marvel. Then what are you going to say? Probably something juvenile like “The Snyder cultists didn't give it a chance!”

We'd all like to see another great Superman movie. I just want to see good movies, period.

I like the stories, not the fanville.

Or maybe you're an agoraphobe. (See? That's an assumption.)

Don't care.

Maybe you two have something in common.

I did not define "quality". I said they were successful. They were - all three GotG movies were.[/.quote]

Financially successful. Artistically? That's a whole other discussion.

The Suicide Squad is only marginally better (but the writing still left much to be desired).

Meh. It's not that much better than the original.

Try to keep up. I was clearly referring to TSS being “marginally better” than GOTGV2, not Ayer's film.

[verslibre]

https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-lists/greatest-superhero-movies-of-all-time-1367814/batman-returns-1992-1368066/?fbclid=IwAR01Wr6qS4fcGe9TNplMGJ4m1TpWg0BA9D-IEO-vs2hxaTAeIBtvaM6j63o

50 Greatest Superhero Movies of All Time

1 | ‘Zack Snyder’s Justice League’ (2021)

"Forget, just for a second, the torturous online campaigns and toxic fandoms, the studio-brass handwringing, the behind-the-scenes shenanigans and — please, in the name of Jor-El — the theatrical cut of what was designed to be the pinnacle of DC’s Extended Universe. Zack Snyder’s long, extended version of his supergroup epic does not just improve upon its predecessor; it demonstrates a reverence for these legacy characters, fleshes out some key backstories, and drops everyone into a battle royale against a much more worthy villain. (Give it up for Apokolips’ heavyweight champion of the universe, Darkseid!) This is the superhero movie as self-serious Wagnerian sturm-und-drang epic, a riot of slo-mo action sequences and narrative big-swings that, for at least four hours, makes you feel like there’s someone who is treating these DCEU heroes and villains like the gods and monsters they are on the page."

[Monker]

So, "Blue Beetle" is out. Well DC fans support it? It seems it is a decent movie. Seems to me the pattern is they won't. Seems to me it will go over about as well as Shazam 2...which is not good enough.

[jestor92]

Saw Blue Beetle yesterday. It was a solid movie. Best DC film since the first Wonder Woman movie. It wasn’t dark like the Snyderverse films and it had some funny moments which I’m sure will turn some of the DC fan base off. I hope they decide to continue the series as part of the Gunn DC Universe.

I thought George Lopez was great in the film. The rest of the actors didn’t really stand out to me, but they did a very solid job.

[Monker]

Saw Blue Beetle yesterday. It was a solid movie. Best DC film since the first Wonder Woman movie. It wasn’t dark like the Snyderverse films and it had some funny moments which I’m sure will turn some of the DC fan base off. I hope they decide to continue the series as part of the Gunn DC Universe.

I thought George Lopez was great in the film. The rest of the actors didn’t really stand out to me, but they did a very solid job.

It barely cleared $100million GLOBAL. That is absolutely horrible. The worst of the Marvel movies did far better. Why would they make a sequel to a movie that is the worst grossing movie of the DCEU. He may show up as a sorta side character. Maybe.

Shazam failed. Flash failed. Blue Beetle failed. Each grossing less. Shazam AND Blue Beetle were supposed to be good, I have not seen either...but it is OBVIOUS they under performed. Going back to last year, even Black Adam did not live up to Rock's hype and a Caville Superman cameo.

A few things are going on, IMO. The DCEU is dead so why see these movies? They will not connect to the DCU. Even Gunn saying Blue Beetle was the first DCU character did not help much. I think people are tired of mediocre CBM's. Marvel used to get away with it: Iron Man 2, Age of Ultron, Thor 2...but not any longer. It seems people feel that unless the movie lives up to the hype and is relevant, they are not worth seeing in the theater. These will all be on streaming, soon. Unless Aquaman can deliver a visual spectacle like the first, and have better acting and a good story...it may also struggle to break even. YJ *GUARANTEED* it would be a billion dollar film...I doubt that is going to happen. No reason to see it, not directly connected to the DCU, the story and acting in the last film was mediocre....it can wait for streaming.

NONE of these movies should have been released to theaters. I could see sending Aquaman direct to Max but the rest should have been cut and the tax deduction taken, like Batgirl, which means no streaming of Blu-ray release. I have to wonder how many tens of millions of dollars WB lost on those three films. A very dumb move.

[jestor92]

Saw Blue Beetle yesterday. It was a solid movie. Best DC film since the first Wonder Woman movie. It wasn’t dark like the Snyderverse films and it had some funny moments which I’m sure will turn some of the DC fan base off. I hope they decide to continue the series as part of the Gunn DC Universe.

I thought George Lopez was great in the film. The rest of the actors didn’t really stand out to me, but they did a very solid job.

It barely cleared $100million GLOBAL. That is absolutely horrible. The worst of the Marvel movies did far better. Why would they make a sequel to a movie that is the worst grossing movie of the DCEU. He may show up as a sorta side character. Maybe.

Shazam failed. Flash failed. Blue Beetle failed. Each grossing less. Shazam AND Blue Beetle were supposed to be good, I have not seen either...but it is OBVIOUS they under performed. Going back to last year, even Black Adam did not live up to Rock's hype and a Caville Superman cameo.

A few things are going on, IMO. The DCEU is dead so why see these movies? They will not connect to the DCU. Even Gunn saying Blue Beetle was the first DCU character did not help much. I think people are tired of mediocre CBM's. Marvel used to get away with it: Iron Man 2, Age of Ultron, Thor 2...but not any longer. It seems people feel that unless the movie lives up to the hype and is relevant, they are not worth seeing in the theater. These will all be on streaming, soon. Unless Aquaman can deliver a visual spectacle like the first, and have better acting and a good story...it may also struggle to break even. YJ *GUARANTEED* it would be a billion dollar film...I doubt that is going to happen. No reason to see it, not directly connected to the DCU, the story and acting in the last film was mediocre....it can wait for streaming.

NONE of these movies should have been released to theaters. I could see sending Aquaman direct to Max but the rest should have been cut and the tax deduction taken, like Batgirl, which means no streaming of Blu-ray release. I have to wonder how many tens of millions of dollars WB lost on those three films. A very dumb move.

I’m not disagreeing with you. Beetle I think was a solid movie. In my opinion it was my 3rd favorite movie for the DC folks post Chris Nolan Batman films. I’d go Man of Steel, Wonder Woman, Blue Beetle, Shazam. The rest weren’t good and killed the franchise. It also didn’t help they have a lot of side movies going on like the Pattinson Batman, Joker franchise, Suicide Squad.

[Monker]

I’m not disagreeing with you. Beetle I think was a solid movie. In my opinion it was my 3rd favorite movie for the DC folks post Chris Nolan Batman films. I’d go Man of Steel, Wonder Woman, Blue Beetle, Shazam. The rest weren’t good and killed the franchise. It also didn’t help they have a lot of side movies going on like the Pattinson Batman, Joker franchise, Suicide Squad.

Yes, I understand. I was not trying argue with you, really. I said before that Blue Beetle is supposed to be a good movie. My point is that as a DC movie, Blue Beetle may be good, or even great, but the fact is that it is not getting people in the seats. Neither did Flash, neither did Shazam. Even Black Adam struggled. So, Blue Beetle could be the best DC movie ever but it still lost money for WB...and company that can't keep releasing films that lose money cuz of their debt.

Star Wars is in the same place. Because of what happened to the last trilogy, Solo, etc, and even some of the Disney+ series that are mediocre...things are just being written off by fans. I absolutely love the Ahsoka series. It's probably my favorite Disney+ show right now. It expands the lore. It has awesome action scenes. IMO,it has been executed very, very well. But, it is not getting any attention. The ratings are mediocre at best. YouTube creators seem to like the show but are down on it because their views go down when they release Ahsoka content. It completely sucks...I'm convinced this is the direction Star Wars should have taken instead of the sequel trilogy. But, people (not just "fans") are tired of the mediocrity that Star Wars and Disney+ has delivered to them and are moving on to other things.

That is what has happened to DC. Where are all the Snyder fans supporting the last few DCEU movies? They are not as many as we were told to believe, and they are as fickle as the general public. If they were as supporting as they claimed, they would have been there for Shazam and Flash with all the cameos. They DEFINITELY would have shown up in mass for Black Adam. The truth is that the Snyderverse died last October or whenever it was obvious that Black Adam barely broke even. Now it is up to Gunn to bring the fandom together with his new Superman. That is going to be an uphill battle, because nobody cares about DC any longer. If it fails, Gunn will solely get the blame. The blame is really WB's fault for releasing all these movies that nobody cares about and putting more red in the ledger...and it is going to be tough to erase it. DC having an Avengers type release is probably 10yrs away.

[verslibre]

Where are all the Snyder fans supporting the last few DCEU movies? They are not as many as we were told to believe, and they are as fickle as the general public. If they were as supporting as they claimed, they would have been there for Shazam and Flash with all the cameos. They DEFINITELY would have shown up in mass for Black Adam. The truth is that the Snyderverse died last October or whenever it was obvious that Black Adam barely broke even.

Black Adam grossed 393 million worldwide, only nine million less than The Eternals the year before. Their domestic openings were only a few million apart, and Black Adam played in fourteen fewer countries than The Eternals, which enjoyed a greater promotional push (because WB worked overtime to undermine Dwayne Johnson's efforts to get Black Adam made for years.

That said, it's been a hot seller on video.

https://www.mediaplaynews.com/black-adam-returns-to-no-1-on-dvd-and-blu-ray-sales-charts/

Now it is up to Gunn to bring the fandom together with his new Superman. That is going to be an uphill battle, because nobody cares about DC any longer. If it fails, Gunn will solely get the blame.

No different than Zack getting blamed for everything from 2013 to 2022, which you don't have a problem with.

[jestor92]

Saw Blue Beetle yesterday. It was a solid movie. Best DC film since the first Wonder Woman movie. It wasn’t dark like the Snyderverse films and it had some funny moments which I’m sure will turn some of the DC fan base off. I hope they decide to continue the series as part of the Gunn DC Universe.

I thought George Lopez was great in the film. The rest of the actors didn’t really stand out to me, but they did a very solid job.

It barely cleared $100million GLOBAL. That is absolutely horrible. The worst of the Marvel movies did far better. Why would they make a sequel to a movie that is the worst grossing movie of the DCEU. He may show up as a sorta side character. Maybe.

Shazam failed. Flash failed. Blue Beetle failed. Each grossing less. Shazam AND Blue Beetle were supposed to be good, I have not seen either...but it is OBVIOUS they under performed. Going back to last year, even Black Adam did not live up to Rock's hype and a Caville Superman cameo.

A few things are going on, IMO. The DCEU is dead so why see these movies? They will not connect to the DCU. Even Gunn saying Blue Beetle was the first DCU character did not help much. I think people are tired of mediocre CBM's. Marvel used to get away with it: Iron Man 2, Age of Ultron, Thor 2...but not any longer. It seems people feel that unless the movie lives up to the hype and is relevant, they are not worth seeing in the theater. These will all be on streaming, soon. Unless Aquaman can deliver a visual spectacle like the first, and have better acting and a good story...it may also struggle to break even. YJ *GUARANTEED* it would be a billion dollar film...I doubt that is going to happen. No reason to see it, not directly connected to the DCU, the story and acting in the last film was mediocre....it can wait for streaming.

NONE of these movies should have been released to theaters. I could see sending Aquaman direct to Max but the rest should have been cut and the tax deduction taken, like Batgirl, which means no streaming of Blu-ray release. I have to wonder how many tens of millions of dollars WB lost on those three films. A very dumb move.

Out of curiosity how much if any do you feel Beetle, Shazam, and The Flash suffered from folks knowing that no matter how good the movies are it’s likely going to be a 1 and done movie regardless of how good the movies were do to WB bringing Gunn in to be their Feige?

[Monker]

Out of curiosity how much if any do you feel Beetle, Shazam, and The Flash suffered from folks knowing that no matter how good the movies are it’s likely going to be a 1 and done movie regardless of how good the movies were do to WB bringing Gunn in to be their Feige?

I think that is a HUGE part of it. What is the point of seeing these movies if there not going to be any follow up?

Gunn did say that Blue Beetle was the first MCU movie...then he back tracked a bit and said he meant that the Blue Beetle character was the first DCU character introduced, but the movie is not DCU cannon. I've read/seen Jason Momoa saying Aquaman 2 isn't a movie where some outside of the Earth threat had to be defeated...that it was a self contained movie without all these connection. In other words, he is trying to sell the idea that it is not "really" connected to the DCEU OR the DCU. It's kind of a weird sell. But, it doesn't matter. The trailers I have seen seem to show a mediocre movie that may do OK, but not nearly what WB should be expecting. NONE of these DCEU movies should have been released this year.

Another point I want to make is that if Snyder fans REALLY matter...that they are huge in numbers...then ALL of these movies should have been great successes. This is the last of the Snyderverse movies...you would think Snyder fans would be all in to make their poster boy shine...but they are not, and Snyder doesn't come out looking good.

[verslibre]

Another point I want to make is that if Snyder fans REALLY matter...that they are huge in numbers...then ALL of these movies should have been great successes. This is the last of the Snyderverse movies...you would think Snyder fans would be all in to make their poster boy shine...but they are not, and Snyder doesn't come out looking good.

Nice try, Monkey boy.

Snyder is and has been gone from DC. He's getting the green light to make films with sizeable budgets elsewhere. WB's overseers spin a bullshit narrative the way a spider spins webs in order to string the fans along for as long as they inhumanly can. They've not stopped messing with their directors. The mindless, endless, arbitrary tweaks are impulsively and liberally strewn about, all in the name of vainly squeezing a few more bucks from their superhero IPs. Big OOPS.

As for Gunn, inconsistency appears to be his mantra. He says one thing, counters, amends, then tries unsuccessfully to smooth his bs over. Nobody's buying it. Nobody.

The Gunnverse is practically DOA. Discovery needs to sell WB to Universal now so they can course-correct and rebuild. Discovery's head honcho is not interested in the art of making films, let alone CBMs.

[Monker]

Snyder is and has been gone from DC.

Correct. He's been gone since Justice League. However, you Snyder fans have been pining for his return ever since. It got so ridiculous that you guys were staring at statues for hidden meaning that Snyder would be doing another DC movie. EVERYTHING was about Snyder. So, if you loved him so much, you guys would have flocked to the few of Snyder's charactters. But, you guys are not as numerous as you think and you are not as dedicated as you think.

They've not stopped messing with their directors. The mindless, endless, arbitrary tweaks are impulsively and liberally strewn about, all in the name of vainly squeezing a few more bucks from their superhero IPs. Big OOPS.

Oh, stop making excuses. Fiege and Marvel have done that from the start. From what I can see, DC needs to get involved MORE and put the brakes on absolute CRAP like the Harley Quinn movie and WW84. Mediocre farts like Black Adam should have had MORE control by someone to cut the crap and make it more than a poor remake of "The Scorpion King". It's also not just the directors, but the writers who keep coming up with these lame concepts...like Aquaman 2, which looks BORING. Shazam 2 is as mediocre as it comes. Shazam's dialogue reminded me of Tighten from Mega Mind, except Tighten was SUPPOSED to be a lame dumb-ass who couldn't even spell his own Superhero name....and his 'human' name is Hal Stewart, a DC reference that I think is hilarious.

The Gunnverse is practically DOA. Discovery needs to sell WB to Universal now so they can course-correct and rebuild. Discovery's head honcho is not interested in the art of making films, let alone CBMs.

I love how you guys prejudge EVERYTHING. WW2 was to be a billion dollar film. Aquaman 2, a billion dollar film. Now Gunn's universe is DOA. It's all laughable. If Gunn's Superman is a huge hit, you are going to be wrong again...and I am not predicting one way or the other - I don't know.

As for WB/Universal not interested in the art of making film. They are releasing Dune. They released the most successful animated movie this year with Super Mario Bros. They did Oppenheimer. Seems to me you are just pissed off that DC never found a direction that was successful...and now that ALL CBM's are struggling, it could be too late.

[verslibre]

Snyder is and has been gone from DC.

Correct. He's been gone since Justice League. However, you Snyder fans have been pining for his return ever since.

Ah, yes, you are one for the broadest of generalizations. We must never forget that.

We wanted the Snyder Cut of Justice League, i.e., not the cheesed-down turd burger Joss scraped off his lawn with a shovel and hurled at us — and we got it.

We want the Ayer Cut of Suicide Squad — we'll get it at some point, hopefully no later than 2025. Gunn wants to keep the kibosh on the DCEU because he knows it'll affect the trajectory of his plan.

WW84 would've made plenty of money had it not been dropped right when the pandemic was peaking. How much? No way to tell. Patty said it was ready for release in 2019. The delay was a mystery, and it hurt the film.

But, you guys are not as numerous as you think and you are not as dedicated as you think.

You're a broken record, but you already know that. I told you so.

They've not stopped messing with their directors. The mindless, endless, arbitrary tweaks are impulsively and liberally strewn about, all in the name of vainly squeezing a few more bucks from their superhero IPs. Big OOPS.

Oh, stop making excuses. Fiege and Marvel have done that from the start. From what I can see, DC needs to get involved MORE and put the brakes on absolute CRAP like the Harley Quinn movie and WW84. Mediocre farts like Black Adam should have had MORE control by someone to cut the crap and make it more than a poor remake of "The Scorpion King". It's also not just the directors, but the writers who keep coming up with these lame concepts...like Aquaman 2, which looks BORING. {...blah, blah, blah...}

What you're really saying is, accept the movies for what they are in spite of the too-many-cooks sabotage these endeavors — BvS (many scenes cut), Suicide Squad (many reshoots, ending completely changed), Aquaman (Black Manta forced into film when Wan wanted to save him for the sequel), and so on — have sustained, and continue to sustain. Look at the tragedy that is The Flash. That's the omega factor for you, right there. That movie's a freakin' Frankenstein. That's why it bombed when it should've been a roaring success!

If Gunn's Superman is a huge hit, you are going to be wrong again...

That's a BIG "if," buddy. A big one. Bigger than you can guesstimate. There is no buzz around it. Not a stir. Not even a mouse.

As for WB/Universal not interested in the art of making film. They are releasing Dune. They released the most successful animated movie this year with Super Mario Bros. They did Oppenheimer.

Where did I say Universal? I didn't. There you go, putting words in my mouth again. Universal released Oppenheimer. It's not a WB/Universal joint.

Dune is a WB/Legendary joint. WB has been desperate to get another tentpole franchise (like Harry Potter & LOTR) started since the CBMs aren't doing well. Even The Batman, while it did well enough, didn't hit 800 million.

WB has massive debt, and even the surprise box office performance of Barbie is nowhere near enough to right that ship.

Seems to me you are just pissed off that DC never found a direction that was successful...and now that ALL CBM's are struggling, it could be too late.

You must be high. DC had a direction that was successful. HAD. They had a number of dipshits who kept fudging everything up. Then, whenever a couple other showrunners had the fix, they pulled the rug out AGAIN. That's exactly how Gunn got the keys. The head honcho of Discovery only cares about numbers, and the bozo thinks Gunn is the answer. Is it starting to make sense, or are you licking the Adam's Apple part of your Steve Perry mousepad again?

[Monker]

We wanted the Snyder Cut of Justice League, i.e., not the cheesed-down turd burger Joss scraped off his lawn with a shovel and hurled at us — and we got it.

Yes, you did...and Max over spent on it thinking it would boost their subscriptions, and it didn't. In addition, the consensus that I saw was that unless you are a huge DC/Snyder fan, it's really not worth seeing.

We want the Ayer Cut of Suicide Squad — we'll get it at some point, hopefully no later than 2025.

No, you won't. These demands from fans don't pay off. WB should know that by now. Black Adam was the climax of that type of fan service. The Snyder Cut did not help HBO Max. Black Adam did not revive Superman. NONE of these final Snyderverse characters have had a successful movie this year. Snyder fans are a loud bunch of irrelevant fans. Ayer has even fewer.

Gunn wants to keep the kibosh on the DCEU because he knows it'll affect the trajectory of his plan.

Gunn wants to kill the DCEU so DC can start over. He is just being way too diplomatic about it. It's over. Even if Gunn is let go when WB is sold, DC would need to start over.

But, those are not the things I am talking about. You guys went off on saying Snyder was going to work with Cavill and Superman again because of ONE SENTENCE in an interview. You guys over analyze STATUES to say that Snyder is coming back to DC for more movies. You guys have been acting DESPERATE to get Snyder back...and it was never going to happen.

WW84 would've made plenty of money had it not been dropped right when the pandemic was peaking. How much? No way to tell. Patty said it was ready for release in 2019. The delay was a mystery, and it hurt the film.

Even YJ said WW84 is unwatchable and he is the one who said it was a guaranteed to be a billion dollar film! That movie is HORRIBLE. What hurt the film is the story sucked, the acting sucked, WW even sucked compared to the first film. The only good part was the cameo at the end.

What you're really saying is, accept the movies for what they are in spite of the too-many-cooks sabotage these endeavors

No, what I am saying is that someone with more than one brain cell should be over seeing these films and either sending them to the garbage can or back to being rewritten and reshot.

BvS (many scenes cut)

And, they still kept "Martha". The entire premise is stupid. If all you want to see is Batman and Superman fight, OK, good job. If you want to see a coherent story that makes sense...BvS sucks, bad. The cut scenes don't change it by that much.

Suicide Squad (many reshoots, ending completely changed)

Blame trying to emulate the awesome sauce of "Guardians of the Galaxy".

This is probably the only one where you have a point.

Aquaman (Black Manta forced into film when Wan wanted to save him for the sequel)

Yeah, they should "fix" a billion dollar film. Smart idea there.

Look at the tragedy that is The Flash.

Nobody cares about the Flash. They are all at "Baby Showers". That film had many problems...being tied to the DCEU among the top. It should have never been released. It should have been Batgirl'd.

That movie's a freakin' Frankenstein. That's why it bombed when it should've been a roaring success!

It bombed because Ezra is a freak, the DCEU is dead, bad special effects, and a story that nobody cared about any longer.

WB has massive debt, and even the surprise box office performance of Barbie is nowhere near enough to right that ship.

That is true...but don't say they don't respect the art of movies just because DC is in the shitter. It is also a big reason why ALL of the DCEU movies following Black Adam should have become tax write-offs and Batgirl'd.

You must be high. DC had a direction that was successful. HAD. They had a number of dipshits who kept fudging everything up. Then, whenever a couple other showrunners had the fix, they pulled the rug out AGAIN. That's exactly how Gunn got the keys.

LOL...MOS and BvS setup failure. The entire idea of jumping into BvS and setting up Justice League was STUPID. Then you get into Black Superman, Supergirl replacing Superman, Batgirl replacing Afleck. I was joking about Wonder Twins back then but I read that was going to be a HBO Max show! All of that was STUPID. So, now you have Gunn saying "Fuck all of that" and starting over completely. That should have been done after Justice League. All of the Snyder characters should have been recast and started over with a new direction and slow build up to Justice League. Gunn has the right idea.

But, as I said, all CBM's are now struggling. So, good luck with all that! The hot thing now is VGM's (video game movies)! Maybe they can now do a movie based on the Arkham games! LOL.

[Monker]

So, we have Loki getting low'ish number of viewers....even though it is a pretty good show. And, we have the Marvels movie opening day < 100million, lower than The Flash. And, to me, it doesn't look THAT bad...at least not as bad as The Flash. And, South Park, as usual, knew exactly what buttons to push.

IMO, this doesn't look good for Aquaman. A DCEU film that doesn't connect to the future of DC AND CBM's in general going south, and the SAG strike making it hard to promote. You can blame whoever you want, but IIMO, Aquaman 2 isn't going to do much better.

Ironically, DC doing a reboot and NOT doing the multiverse thing to "fix' the DCEU may have put them ahead of the curve with Marvel. South Park's "Panderverse" and "multiverses are stupid" lines would have done nothing but made it harder to accept that solution....especially with Supergirl taking over for Superman, and doubly if she was gay. Now Marvel has to pivot away quickly...maybe drop Kang and move into their other movies to get away from the multiverse. Do a Captain Marvel/Rogue movie, start looking at X-Men and Fantastic 4. I know there is talk of bringing back the old characters. I think that would be a mistake. And, I would do some work on Deadpool and have him totally make fun of the multiverse while he himself is being drug through it...if he is not doing it already.,,maybe add a scene to make fun of South Park.

BTW, this really shows the staying power of South Park. They have never jumped the shark the past 25yrs...this one South Park episode could get Kathleen Kennedy fired and Bob Igor may be nervous. That is pretty amazing for two guys who constantly give Hollywood the middle finger and constantly parody and insult them.

[verslibre]

So, we have Loki getting low'ish number of viewers....even though it is a pretty good show. And, we have the Marvels movie opening day < 100million, lower than The Flash. And, to me, it doesn't look THAT bad...at least not as bad as The Flash. And, South Park, as usual, knew exactly what buttons to push.

Since I know you love reviews and abide by them, The Marvels is getting positively savaged! It sounds like a complete turd burger-dumpster fire-diarrhea blastin' triple-whammy.

The Marvels, review: the superhero franchise sinks to a new low

Comedy is attempted in a sequence which uses the song Memory from Cats almost as badly as Cats did, and on a visit to a planet whose population’s native tongue is song and dance. This potentially funny idea is scuppered by wincingly slapdash execution, including some awkward visual effects work which makes the three stars look cut-and-pasted into the musical number as an afterthought. Who knows, maybe they were: the franchise’s now-trademark VFX sloppiness is back with a vengeance here, with flying scenes that resemble souvenir photographs from a sky-diving simulator, and digital backdrops rendered in 50 shades of sludge.

“Higher, further, faster” ran the original Captain Marvel’s rousing tagline. “Have we reached the bottom yet?” would be an apt one for this.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2023/ ... ie-larson/

Wow. That makes The Flash sound epic.

IMO, this doesn't look good for Aquaman. A DCEU film that doesn't connect to the future of DC AND CBM's in general going south, and the SAG strike making it hard to promote. You can blame whoever you want, but IIMO, Aquaman 2 isn't going to do much better.

Five years since the original + the systematic dismantling of the DCEU + active and reactive tampering with the directors' films. What'd you expect?

BTW, this really shows the staying power of South Park. They have never jumped the shark the past 25yrs...this one South Park episode could get Kathleen Kennedy fired and Bob Igor may be nervous. That is pretty amazing for two guys who constantly give Hollywood the middle finger and constantly parody and insult them.

Clarification: South Park has never jumped the shark for guys like you who never graduated from fratboy toilet humor. Not everyone is a fan of that crapola.

[verslibre]

We want the Ayer Cut of Suicide Squad — we'll get it at some point, hopefully no later than 2025.

No, you won't.

You've seen the future? Tell us, Nostrildumbass, how do you foresee these events to come? Do you consult your Magic 8-Ball, or do you have your best bud coddle your nutsack while you attach clothespins to your earlobes? Then the visions come!!

Gunn wants to kill the DCEU so DC can start over.

As you can see, your fave dude can't even do that right.

Yeah, they should "fix" a billion dollar film. Smart idea there.

Yet again, thou speaketh from thine keester.

[Monker]

So, we have Loki getting low'ish number of viewers....even though it is a pretty good show. And, we have the Marvels movie opening day < 100million, lower than The Flash. And, to me, it doesn't look THAT bad...at least not as bad as The Flash. And, South Park, as usual, knew exactly what buttons to push.

Since I know you love reviews and abide by them, The Marvels is getting positively savaged! It sounds like a complete turd burger-dumpster fire-diarrhea blastin' triple-whammy.

The Marvels, review: the superhero franchise sinks to a new low

The reviews I have seen are mixed. It's a love it or hate it movie, it seems. For every negative review, I could find a positive. Some people like the fact that there is a lot of humor, others hate it. Some people love Flerkins, some don't. It started on RT as rotten and has moved up to the other mediocre movies Marvel has released recently...and there are even articles about that. And, it has a pretty decent audience score at 85%...FWIW. Point is, you are way overexaggerating.

Wow. That makes The Flash sound epic.

Only if you are a woman gossiping at a "baby shower".

Five years since the original + the systematic dismantling of the DCEU + active and reactive tampering with the directors' films. What'd you expect?

I expect you people to back up your claims that a film is GUARANTEED to be a billion dollar film years before its release. You don't know what is going to happen. All of those things were not even in your head when you guys were arguing that that film was GUARANTEED to be HUGE. The same argument was made for WW84. You guys were even arguing that DC knows how to do the multiverse and the Flash movie was the start of this wonderful thing. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Then you make excuses like above! Maybe you guys should not make such predictions years in advance and wait.

NOW you are arguing how horrible Gunn's DCU will be. YOU DON'T KNOW! TBD!

Clarification: South Park has never jumped the shark for guys like you who never graduated from fratboy toilet humor. Not everyone is a fan of that crapola.

Which is EXACTLY why South Park has not jumped the shark. It does not cater to critics like you who only want to critique their type of humor...and refuse to see the deeper social commentary, political commentary, pop culture references, and nostalgia. Whether it is releasing the perfect Osama bin Laden episode after 9/11, the various Sadam Hussein eposides, homosexuality with the early "Big Gay Al" episodes, remastering and adding scenes to the original "Star Wars" trilogy and other movies, the "rape" of Indiana Jones for the "Crystal Skull" movie, the Scientology/Mormon/Jehovah Witness episodes, they pushed the boundaries of Islam by showing Mohamed (which was censored, and they made fun of that, too!), the "douche vs. turd" episode, growing pot on Tegridy Farms, making fun of orange faced Trump...they hold a mirror up to society and comment on it in their own way....which is the very definition of art!

YEARS ago they did the Mysterion trilogy to mimic Batman...along with the Coon who mimics Wolverine. They did the "Coon and Friends" episodes a few years ago making fun of the old MCU vs DCEU dynamic (and I THINK Cartman said DC sucks!)...which was a prequel to "The Fractured But Whole" video game, which is all about Superheroes. So, it's not like this is new to them. They are fans...obviously since they added "Kiteman" to their lineup.

In addition, they have made fun of Disney in the past for their China "pandering" to get movies released there...and made fun of China by using "Winnie the Pooh" references.

There are not too many shows who can release an episode exclusively on a third tier streaming service (Paramount+) and then impact a ton of memes making fun of Disney, to the point where Kathleen Kennedy and Bob Igor had their future being questioned publicly. South Park is MUCH more than just "frat boy humor"...it is social and political commentary, some of which has become iconic.

Trey Parker is a genius. Not only does he creatively control South Park which has won an Emmy and a Peabody award, but "The Book of Mormon" won 9 Tony awards!

It just makes me laugh. It's like trying to insult Cyrano de Bergerac by saying he has a big nose ;V)

[verslibre]

You can defend South Park all day if you like. I won't read the posts because the show and its creator(s) don't matter to me. That stuff stopped being funny decades ago. I don't care for Family Guy, either. There's only so much mileage in those things, but the people who won't stop loving fart jokes keep them alive.

Are you going to go watch The Marvels? I don't remember if you actually pay to watch anything or just enjoy commenting on stuff ad nauseum.

[Monker]

You can defend South Park all day if you like. I won't read the posts because the show and its creator(s) don't matter to me. That stuff stopped being funny decades ago. I don't care for Family Guy, either. There's only so much mileage in those things, but the people who won't stop loving fart jokes keep them alive.

LOL. You can't really talk about the problems at Disney/Marvel/Star Wars without including South Park and "The Panderverse". That is just the way it is. Alternate version Kathleen Kennedy/Cartman going about telling Disney execs to fix movies by "put a chick in it and make her gay." LIve action Bambi? Put a chick in it and make her gay. Order a plate of pasta, don't give it to her unless you put a chick in it and make her gay. The four boys in South Park in an alternate universe being four girls of color. Colonel Sanders being a black woman. They absolutely panned Disney...and that was the start of a huge wave. It wasn't just a fart joke...too funny. Tho Cartman did have too much KFC and complained about diarrhea...sure you love that...but I think it was there to set up the Colonel Sander joke above.

So, Marvel now has a huge issue. The issues people predetermined about "The Marvels" were greatly amplified. Kathleen Kennedy doubled down on being "inclusive" and it made her look REALLY stupid and out of touch. Bob Igor did the earnings call and was obviously stressed...where the only positive thing was Disney fully integrating Hulu next year. South Park was HUGE influence in all of that.,.in an episode only on Paramount+, LOL.

Also, South Park dedicated an entire episode critiquing Family Guy and their lame jokes. They are more comparable to the Simpsons, and they are fans. Bart even guest starred in one episode and there was the "Simpsons Did It" episode.

Family Guy could never be able to cause the fuss that South Park did...I doubt The Simpsons could, either.

Are you going to go watch The Marvels? I don't remember if you actually pay to watch anything or just enjoy commenting on stuff ad nauseum.

I don't know. To me, it looks like it could be a fun movie, a bit flerkin silly I am sure...but I don't think it looks "screaming goat" or "baby shower" bad. So, if I get a chance to see it, I probably will...not avoiding it, not seeking it out.

Saw "Five Nights at Freddy's" and thought it was good. IMO, movie quality in general has been falling for a couple years now, predating the strikes - which I am sure did not help. The only movie I am looking forward to seeing is Dune 2. I can't think of anything else that is upcoming in the next year that I am excited about.

[verslibre]

For every negative review, I could find a positive.

I dunno. It's looking pretty dire out there for this one.

The only movie I am looking forward to seeing is Dune 2.

Yeah, man! Quality space opera sans lightsabers.

[Monker]

For every negative review, I could find a positive.

I dunno. It's looking pretty dire out there for this one.

Not really. You are just viewing it in this atmosphere in the fallout from South Park. It's doing pretty much the same as the last few Marvel releases which is about what I expected.

The only movie I am looking forward to seeing is Dune 2.

Yeah, man! Quality space opera sans lightsabers.

Not talking about Rebel Moon...and it DOES have "lightsabers".

[verslibre]

For every negative review, I could find a positive.

I dunno. It's looking pretty dire out there for this one.

Not really. You are just viewing it in this atmosphere in the fallout from South Park.

I can't view it in the context of anything South Park because I don't watch it.

It's doing pretty much the same as the last few Marvel releases which is about what I expected.

Is that so?

You must have your Feigegoggles™ on if you think The Marvels isn't being deemed a flat-out bomb. Its opening was less than that of The Flash and it barely made over 100 million worldwide its opening weekend. It's both a commercial fail and a critical dumpster fire.

Looks like DisMarvelney's conveyor belt approach to making movies and shows is finally crapping out. They're going from "everything's samey" to "everything's suckey." The fans aren't having it. It is what it is.

[Monker]

Not really. You are just viewing it in this atmosphere in the fallout from South Park.

I can't view it in the context of anything South Park because I don't watch it.

That's not what I said. I said in the atmosphere in the fallout from South Park. That took the negativity being directed at Disney and Marvel and amplified it by a huge amount. It does not matter if YOU watch South Park, or not. Others do and the critique they were presenting went viral. That is a simple fact.

It's doing pretty much the same as the last few Marvel releases which is about what I expected.

Is that so?

Yes, it is. We were talking about how it was being reviewed. Last I looked, it has a 63 on RT, which is right in line with Quantumania and Love and Thunder.

You must have your Feigegoggles™ on if you think The Marvels isn't being deemed a flat-out bomb. Its opening was less than that of The Flash and it barely made over 100 million worldwide its opening weekend. It's both a commercial fail and a critical dumpster fire.

Yeah, it is being portrayed as this huge bomb, etc, just as you said. I have not argued anything about this!

Looks like DisMarvelney's conveyor belt approach to making movies and shows is finally crapping out. They're going from "everything's samey" to "everything's suckey." The fans aren't having it. It is what it is.

First of all, "Loki" did not suck...the story arc for the two seasons is one of the best things Marvel has ever done.

What you are saying is so one note. There is a lot more here that I tried to explain earlier.

Captain Marvel and Brie Larson: The first Captain Marvel movie was a billion dollar movie, that's true. But, it was HUGELY controversial and devisive. Brie's public comments did not help the situation. So, this is NOT much of a positive. Both needed to be built back up with another solo movie before something like this.

Taking characters from Disney+ series and using them as costars is also not very helpful. Not many are going to be rushing out to see this for Monica Rambau Most people do not even remember her from WandaVision by this time. Ms. Marvel was one of the least popular series on Disney+ so what does she bring to the table?

Making a comedy out of it falls right in line with critics like you who do not accept Marvel comedy.

Nobody wants to see a Marvel comedy led by three women...one who is already fighting a negative view and two who nobody even knows about.

In addition to that:

There is the general "put a chick in it and make her gay" and "the multiverse sucks" attitude that South Park put out there. The direction this movie is taking the MCU is one that is not popular AT ALL by the public and is the current topic for critique. And, all things Disney are taking hits. Want to see a bomb? Follow what happens with "Wish".

It is pretty obvious to me that CBM's in general are no where near as popular as they were even a year ago. The public is not invested in them as they were. There are some successes, like Guardians 3 and the animated Spiderverse movie, but those are only loosely connected to these connected universes and they can stand on their own.

So, with all of that going against "The Marvels", it is not surprising to me at all that it only made $104million worldwide. I expected it, months ago. And, it really doesn't matter how good the movie is, that is around where it would have been.

[verslibre]

Look at all that. "Alexa, launch a word salad!"

Maybe I'll read it later if I have the time.

South Park isn't the reason The Marvels bombed.

Oh:

The first Captain Marvel movie was a billion dollar movie, that's true.

Because Disney bought the tickets. There's no way a character like that would outgross the world-famous Wonder Woman in her own movie.

[Monker]

South Park isn't the reason The Marvels bombed.

I didn't say it was. But, it is undeniably a contributing factor. I even posted on YouTube a year or so ago, whenever the movie was announced, that it was a bad idea.

It seems like you are trying to make me all defensive or surprised that this is where it would be. I'm not. This is exactly where I expected it to be.

The first Captain Marvel movie was a billion dollar movie, that's true.

Because Disney bought the tickets. There's no way a character like that would outgross the world-famous Wonder Woman in her own movie.[/quote]

That is a flat out lie, and you know it. It makes absolutely NO SENSE for ANY studio to buy tickets as you are lying about. It's common sense. If they boosted this film by, say $500million dollars, then they would LOSE MONEY, tens of millions of dollars, and they would have to buy over five million tickets. It makes absolutely NO SENSE. You are just jealous that people went to see it and it was a HUGE hit. In addition, if they did it and it seemed to work, there is no reason they would not do it for other films that followed. This is just a lie made up by people who are in denial that Captain Marvel was a hugely successful film.

The other theory is that it was between Infinity War and End Game. Well, "Antman and the Wasp" was also released in that time frame and was not nearly as successful...and Antman was also integral to the plot of "End Game". People went to see it because it was a new character...the first new character of the next phase of films, and was teased for End Game...and it is not nearly as bad as critics like you claim. People not only went to see it, but saw it multiple times to push it to a billion.

[verslibre]

That is a flat out lie, and you know it. It makes absolutely NO SENSE for ANY studio to buy tickets as you are lying about. It's common sense. If they boosted this film by, say $500million dollars, then they would LOSE MONEY, tens of millions of dollars, and they would have to buy over five million tickets. It makes absolutely NO SENSE. You are just jealous that people went to see it and it was a HUGE hit. In addition, if they did it and it seemed to work, there is no reason they would not do it for other films that followed. This is just a lie made up by people who are in denial that Captain Marvel was a hugely successful film.

The other theory is that it was between Infinity War and End Game. Well, "Antman and the Wasp" was also released in that time frame and was not nearly as successful...and Antman was also integral to the plot of "End Game". People went to see it because it was a new character...the first new character of the next phase of films, and was teased for End Game...and it is not nearly as bad as critics like you claim. People not only went to see it, but saw it multiple times to push it to a billion.

But it wasn't a genuine "hit." There was no buzz. It was roundly and soundly rated a so-so movie and its final box office gross is highly suspect, sandwiched between Infinity War and Endgame or not.

Brie Larson has the charisma of a two-by-four. She doesn't own the role the way her predecessors have owned theirs.

Did you actually go see that movie? Of course, you did not. Had you, you may have noticed the empty rows of IMAX seats that were suspiciously reserved. There were reports of this across the country. A friend and his wife who went to see the movie said the same thing, and we discussed it on another forum (that gets a lot more activity than this one): no seats available in the first several IMAX rows, but they were completely empty.

Put on your Sherlock cap, dude. They wrote off that shadow play as "Miscellanous Expenses." You think their accounting dept. doesn't get creative when they receive that memo? Wake UP.

Aquaman, however, was legit. There wasn't an empty seat in the house when I went to see that. The kids in that joint were excited — buzz galore Aquaman kicked Mary Poppins right outta there and did three times the business.