Moderator: Andrew
verslibre wrote:F YEAH!
CinemaCon: Warner Bros. Chief Says Ben Affleck's Stand-Alone 'Batman' Movie Is a Go
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/warner-bros-chief-confirms-ben-883358?utm_source=twitter
Kevin Tsujihara appeared Tuesday at the annual gathering of theater owners to tout the studio's upcoming slate, including the stand-alone, which Affleck will star in and direct.
Warner Bros. chairman and CEO Kevin Tsujihara confirmed Tuesday his studio is moving ahead with Ben Affleck's stand-alone Batman movie, which the actor will star in and direct.
The studio mogul touched on the movie when appearing at CinemaCon, the annual gathering of cinema operators in Las Vegas. He touted the record-opening of Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, which teams Batman (Affleck) and Superman (Henry Cavill) on the big screen for the first time and launches the DC cinematic universe.
"It set up a great foundation for our DC slate, which includes at least 10 movies through 2020," Tsuijhara said. "I'm also excited to know that we will be working with Ben Affleck on a stand-alone Batman movie."
This isn't the first time the prospect of an Affleck-originated Batman movie has been raised. During San Diego Comic-Con last year, The Hollywood Reporter reported that the actor-director was developing a stand-alone Batman project with DC Entertainment chief creative officer Geoff Johns.
And in a recent THR interview with WME-IMG's co-CEOs Ari Emanuel and Patrick Whitesell, Whtesell reveals how many movies Affleck has currently signed up for when it comes to DC's Caped Crusader.
"He's contracted to do at least Justice League One and Two, so at least three times wearing the cape," Whitesell said, adding, "There's a script that he's written that is a really cool [Batman] idea, so that's out there as an option."
Batman v. Superman, directed by Zack Snyder, has grossed nearly $800 million to date, despite a steep decline following a record opening.
Following Tsujihara's turn on the stage at CinemaCon, Affleck and Batman co-star Amy Adams introduced a reel touting the DC cinematic universe.
The stand-alone Batman movie has yet to be officially dated, although there's rampant speculation that it will take one of the two slots Warners recently reserved for two untitled DC films; Oct. 5, 2018 and Nov. 1, 2019. The other could go to Suicide Squad 2.
"You get your first real taste of this expanding universe," Warners film chief Greg Silverman said in the clip.
The DC films already dated include Suicide Squad (Aug. 5, 2016), The Justice League Part One (Nov. 17, 2017), The Flash (March 16, 2018), Wonder Woman (June 2, 2017) Aquaman (July 27, 2018), Shazam! (April 5, 2019), Justice League Part Two (June 14, 2019), Cyborg (April 3, 2020) and Green Lantern Corps (June 19, 2020).
YoungJRNYfan wrote:Batman in Suicide Squad:
verslibre wrote:Fanfuckingtastic article that puts a lot into the daggers of unfair expectation:
As Batman V Superman crosses $800mil, here's the advantage Marvel always had over DC:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendel ... aec6954f97
Monker wrote: Does this writer not realize that it is WB who said that if BvS doesn't make at least a billion dollars that they will be disappointed? Up the thread an article was posted that said the reason they may release the R rated version is specifically because they are disappointed in the sales and thought this would be a way to entice some repeat ticket sales. WB is who is expecting more sales....at least they are the ones saying it who matter.
Monker wrote:They could have taken Marvel's path and made a Batman film, a Wonder Woman film, maybe another Superman film, or Aquaman....and THEN went big with BVS and Justice League.
YoungJRNYfan wrote:Monker wrote: Does this writer not realize that it is WB who said that if BvS doesn't make at least a billion dollars that they will be disappointed? Up the thread an article was posted that said the reason they may release the R rated version is specifically because they are disappointed in the sales and thought this would be a way to entice some repeat ticket sales. WB is who is expecting more sales....at least they are the ones saying it who matter.
I'm sure WB is disappointed in the sharp fall, but they already released statements on being happy with success. They know there are ways to hit the 1 Bil mark. BO receipts aren't the only way. Besides, I don't think a re-release will give BvS a nudge into the billion mark. They seem to be more interested in releasing the un-released footage when it came to the complaints of plot holes that people didn't understand. This was evident when WB released a clip from the Ultimate Cut to the public that garnered much attention.
Marvel did the same with Avengers. They re-issued Avengers into theaters for a one week release with the possibility to give fans a new opening and new "post credit scene" to have a better understanding of Iron Man 3 and flicks like Guardian of the Galaxy.
“THE AVENGERS” RETURNS TO THEATERS FOR ONE WEEK STARTING TOMORROW
http://www.ifc.com/2012/08/the-avengers-labor-day
They must have been disappointed the film didn't snag the 2nd highest grossing movie from Titanic. It happens.
To put these numbers in perspective, Forbes reports Batman had an opening weekend of just $42 million, and when its third weekend rolled around, it landed $6.065 million. So as of now, Batman v Superman is dropping at the box office faster than Batman, and that’s after having an opening weekend nearly four times that of the 1989 film from Tim Burton. Even adjusted for inflation, Batman v Superman isn’t doing so hot when compared to Batman.
In the end, Batman v Superman will make some money, but it’s not going to be as big of a hit as the studio was hoping. In fact, the movie probably isn’t even going to cross $1 billion worldwide, and it will just barely cross the $900 million mark if the numbers keep up their current trend.
So the solution that Warner Bros. sees is to bring the R-rated cut of Batman v Superman to the big screen so that curious audiences will flock back to theaters to see the extra 30 minutes of footage on the big screen. After all, since The Boss just beat it at the box office, the studio clearly isn’t getting as much repeat viewers as something like Star Wars: The Force Awakens did.
verslibre wrote:Monker wrote:They could have taken Marvel's path and made a Batman film, a Wonder Woman film, maybe another Superman film, or Aquaman....and THEN went big with BVS and Justice League.
Quit. MoS and BvS are two halves of the same giant story.
Iron Man 2 also featured two new major characters (Fury and Widow) and gave them generous amounts of screen time, including a flamboyant solo fight sequence for the latter.
BvS is a "team-up" film, but it is not a TEAM film. There's a difference.
Btw, we have TWO more movie before the TEAM film. One of them, Suicide Squad, is something we've never seen onscreen before: a cadre of DC villains doing a bunch o' shit!
YoungJRNYfan wrote:In a nutshell, it's throwing it out there that BvS's total's shouldn't be viewed as a failure because it didn't make 1 bil (there's other ways to make
Civil War was actually the fast track because of Batman V Superman laid out by Feige (Captain America writers confirmed this.) Proof is in the pudding.
Monker wrote: And, Marvel is going to do what WB couldn't with BvS...create an awesome film that grosses more than one billion dollars.
And, YOU SAID a few weeks ago that BvS was going to catch up to Marvel in ONE FILM. YOU said it. You have said it for months now.
YoungJRNYfan wrote:Monker wrote: And, Marvel is going to do what WB couldn't with BvS...create an awesome film that grosses more than one billion dollars.
Marvel is on their 13th film of their branded franchise. When Iron Man 3 and AoU can gross over a billion, you know its brand recognition. Batman V Superman is going to flirt with $850-900 after two critically panned films that are dour and dark, let alone a movie not geared towards children for repeat viewings; a movie that everyone was skeptical about since the day it was announced. I never went out on the limb of 1bil for BvS. There was way too much negativity surrounding the movie for 3 years. Void of humor and a movie that asks more questions than answers in a unorthodox style of storytelling, BvS is doing as it should.And, YOU SAID a few weeks ago that BvS was going to catch up to Marvel in ONE FILM. YOU said it. You have said it for months now.
Monker wrote:Now you two are arguing with each other. This is from the article that V posted above:
Monker wrote:And, everybody I talk to says it looks REALLY bad.
Monker wrote:Then they go and reshoot things to make it "less dark".
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
YoungJRNYfan wrote:She is the most important key to that engine. If BvS did anything, it was get people excited for Wonder Woman and her movie (you even said this.) Hence, catching up. There's still two movies until we get to Justice League in this connected Universe (Suicide Squad; Wonder Woman) and you know you're catching up when the untouchable machine that is Marvel Studios are fast-tracking a Captain America movie into a Civil War flick as a response to BvS. Even in the midst of the awful reviews and BO disappointment for WB (disappointment; NOT failure) we saw Marvel immediately react by getting a move on their Captain Marvel film. WONDER what that was in response to? ['/quote]
That's not 'catching up' to Marvel at all. Marvel is at a point in their story arc where they can afford to kill Avengers off for dramatic affect and bring new heroes into Avenger movies....I doubt DC is ready to kill off Aquaman, Superman, or Batman. DC's problem with comparing BvS to Civil War is that Marvel is making a FAR superior movie...even if everything you assume is true. Captain Marvel was rumored for a LONG time before it was confirmed....it did not happen as you are implying it. And, she's going to have a place in the larger story arc other than "Marvel's response to Wonder Woman". If she was such an immediate response to Wonder Woman, or any real response at all...they would already have cast her and had 'cameos' in the current films....just to get attention, and maybe steal it away from Wonder Woman. The fact that they are taking their time to get the character, the actress, and her place in the larger story correct proves to me that she is much more than a simple response to DC.When I said catching up, I didn't mean dollars. With people talking about Flash's flashback/Bruce's nightmare and Wonder Woman (thank Gawd), then DC is doing just fine only 2 films in. I'm most interested in seeing a DCEU film not directed by Snyder. To the GA, that's going to be a big difference.
verslibre wrote:Monker wrote:And, everybody I talk to says it looks REALLY bad.
The two Warcraft guys in the cubicle next to you don't represent the general audience.
Monker wrote:Then they go and reshoot things to make it "less dark".
Unfounded click-bait speculation. Ayer himself said the reshoots were for action, not Marvel-esque humor.
Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests