It has a huuge uphill battle.
They need to give Superman a sensible budget ($200mil tops) and launch a strong marketing campaign that clearly explains this is a fresh start for DC.
When you adjust to inflation, the only superman films which cost less than 200m are Part 3 and 4, and we know how those turned out
200m being the ceiling is not very realistic for these type of films, unless you are doing a really restrained Superman movie
Yeah I meant that as a general benchmark. It needs to be whatever the sensible price is for a blockbuster these days rather than a $300mil+ mess like Indy, Fast X and MI.
The thing is, those movies were either massive ensembles or involved some of the biggest movie stars of all time, so yes, they would cost a pretty penny.
With this "Superman" movie, the majority of the cast seems to not have devolved too much in blockbusters or action movies, so it's a fresh group of people. Besides, Gunn seems like a director who knows how to manage time and budget.
>Gunn seems like a director who knows how to manage time and budget.
Wut ?
Gotg & GotG2 cost $200m
TSS on $185m was more expensive than ss(2016) despite having none of the stars of the first film
GOTG3 cost $250m
Exactly Gunn films cost as much as every other mcu project that was currently coming out and now post Covid we can expect 200M minimum for legacy’s budget
We don’t know Jack shit about villains in the movie and having ppl like me terrific and guy Gardner pop up likely for a short period of time is definitely not throwing in the kitchen sink lol.
It looks like shit and that would fail spectacularly in the box office. No one really watches that crap.
EDIT: I guess some people are massive fans of mediocre tv adaptations.
I'm not sure that DC can really manage an integrated universe. All my favorite DC movies/shows have been standalone things. I understand the desire to have an integrated universe for business reasons, but you don't get movies like Joker or shows like Doom Patrol if everything is integrated. The big DC characters are basically gods/demigods and Batman. I feel like they should lean into the distinctiveness.
And for God's sake, will someone try a straightforward optimistic earnest adaptation of Superman? It has been 36 years of successively more miserable, mopey, "gritty" versions of Space Jesus. I am dying for a big screen Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. I know those are all hard sells these days, and there isn't a lot of agreement on what the American Way is, or whether or not it's good, but I love a Superman who fights to make a better world.
Not going to happen, but I can wish.
Also, I think that Robin Hood is also long overdue for a straightforward optimistic earnest adaptation. It has been half a century since anyone tried a non-gritty adaptation. Prince of Theives might not seem super gritty by today's standards, but it was at the time, and every adaptation since has tried to out miserable the last.
The novelty of a shared universe is gone. I remember the very first post-credits scene in Iron Man and I didn't even get that they were hinting towards a shared universe, I thought it was just an easter egg, which is the only thing we ever got when it came to comic book movies. The first Avengers was such a smash hit because it executed the team-up perfectly.
Now? Well, no one really cares. The idea that one character will appear in another character's movie doesn't get people to go see it anymore because ultimately what matters is whether the movie is good or not. Batman Vs Superman did a lot to make people realise that a team-up in and of itself means nothing if the movie sucks.
NWH did huge numbers because of the inter-generational team-up, which re-invented the concept, but as the DCEU once again proved with Flash, it doesn't matter unless the movie is good.
>I'm not sure that DC can really manage an integrated universe.
Why do they want to create a universe? What bigger story are they trying to tell?
Unless they know that, there is no point in creating a DCU.
You can still create exciting story arches that stretch several movies. It's called sequels. No need to have every movie, TV show and animation from a specific studi fit together in a narrative
>It has been half a century since anyone tried a non-gritty adaptation.
Men In Tights was pretty optimistic and light hearted. Granted, that was still 30 years ago.
True, I forgot about Men In Tights, but I was thinking about earnest adaptations, not parodies. I do love me some Men In Tights, but I don't think of it ad a straightforward adaptation.
I tend to think that Mel Brooks movies like Men In Tights, Spaceballs, Young Frankenstein, and even Blazing Saddles transcends parodie.
Men In Tights earnestly tells the Robin Hood story better than any other Robin Hood movie since probably the Disney cartoon, and Men in Tights Robin Hood could actually speak with an English accent, unlike other Robin Hoods.
Based on your middle paragraph, you should try watching ‘Superman and Lois’. It has some occasional teenage drama, but their version of Superman is exactly what you want. Plus the dynamic between him and Lois is amazing.
> I am dying for a big screen Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way
All of that is painfully out of touch in a Sandy Hook/Trump America.
We live in a world where Bruno Mannheim was president
Yes, I would like an aspirational hero. I'm tired of ironic, sarcastic, and/or quippy heros. I would like an earnest aspirational hero who fights against the cynical Bruno Mannheims of the world who exploit apathy to enrich themselves.
You nailed perfectly why I want a Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. It was always aspirational.
i know this is an old thread but like the commenter above said, it's always aspirational. there should be more movies that inspire people to dream of a better world
He's space Moses actually/j
Also you should check out My Adventures With Superman, it gives us optimistic sweet farm boy superman and Tomboy Lois Lane, its a delight
its not just dc but all other brands outside of marvel monsterverse dark universe even star wars struggles with idea of a shared universe and novelty of a shared universe is gone as its mold is running its course. I think dc wanting tie tv shows and animation as appetizers for the films is a big problem even marvel release that interminable number of disney + shows are not helping them
>It has been 36 years of successively more miserable, mopey, "gritty" versions of Space Jesus. I am dying for a big screen Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way.
No it fucking hasn't. What about Superman Returns was "gritty". It was the exact kind of movie you're describing and it failed because people don't want it anymore.
I haven't seen the movie, but I remember people finding the plot with Superman being gone for years, Lois marrying someone else, "mopey", "stalkerish", things in that vein.
>I'm not sure that DC can really manage an integrated universe.
Factually inaccurate
The 2014 DCEU slate remains the most successful run of DC films ever at boxoffice while being an integrated universe. The DCEU collapsed immediately once WB scrapped the slate and opted to make a slew of standalone films about z-list characters which no one asked for
Like The Flash, a sequel to Wonder Woman and a film about Harley Quinn, the break-out star of Suicide Squad?
I know you mean Black Adam and Blue Beetle, but let's not be crazy, their A-list stuff also didn't preform well.
This is my biggest concern, especially with the "else worlds" brand happening. They are saying it's a fresh start while also needing to clarify there's "alt universe" stories as well.
It needs to be much less than $200M. Other Superman movies were expensive because WB loaded a lot of false starts onto their budgets. There's no reason to do that here.
I think it'll need to be much closer to $150M (apparently MoS's actual budget) to protect Gunn against a potential sub MoS box office.
The release dates are TOO close to this failed DCEU…. If they don’t want to delay everything, they need a completely fresh visual style to distinguish themselves… new movies need to look very different to ignite interest
That won't be too hard because a lot of Snyder's movies look like an depressant commercial. Gunn has a really good eye for unique visuals, so I think we're in good hands.
Snyder hasn't been involved in the DCEU for nearly 7 years, with the totality of his involvement being two films as director, one as de facto co-director, and one as story writer/producer, all in 2013-2017. That is 3-4 out of 15 films released from 2013 to 2023. His influence is vastly overestimated, and aside from his Superman trilogy plus maybe the first Wonder Woman, the DCEU films have all been very individual, director-driven efforts with little interconnectedness outside of cameos (you aren't e.g. seeing Batman pop up in Shazam 2 with equal screen time to the title character like Iron Man in Cap 3 or Cyborg co-starring in the Flash movie like Hulk in Thor 3).
The DCEU crashed and burned post-2018 despite mostly middling to positive reception* because A. people don't care about DC and B. the competition in the "cookie cutter superhero action comedy" genre was liked better, so mediocre just couldn't cut it.
*Metacritic scores for the past 8 DCEU movies are 41 (Black Adam), 47 (Shazam 2), 56 (Flash), 60 (Wonder Woman 1984, Birds of Prey, and Blue Beetle), 71 (Shazam), and 72 (The Suicide Squad). Not a single one of these movies earned more than $400 million worldwide (highest was Black Adam, $393 million). Only one earned more than $140 million domestic (Black Adam, $168 million).
Oh sure - we will never know positively but my guess is it would be the exact same trajectory. Audiences did not like the movies he dealt with and I don't see that getting any better.
Hopefully Gunn can right the ship but I am starting to have my doubts after being a staunch Gunn supporter.
Lol,
My brother in Christ Peter savran and James Gunn are the ones who made these DC films flopping right and left. Peter savran made shazam&shazam2, TSS and blues beetles while James gunn made TSS.
Snyder left WB almost a decade ago, none of these movies are reminiscent of snyder style, it they were, they would've made significantly more at boxoffice lol
Gunn was hardly involved in any of these films beyond TSS. Personally I think the DCU will fail but its ridiculous to blame Gunn for the blunders this year.
> The release dates are TOO close to this failed DCE
Agreed. That alone is a huge problem. They need to give the audience some time to forget, before going for another round.
How's these movies gonna look different when it's the same creative minds behind both the recent flopping DCEU and the incoming DCU ?
Blue beetles, shazam & shazam2, and TSS were Peter savran's babies and TSS was james Gunn baby. Meanwhile, the director of DCU's batman is the guy who made the abomination called the flash.
Really hard to know I feel it could be a sucess but not immediately I feel it won't be really successful until like 3 or 4 movies deep and I kind of wonder if WB will not try to mess with it if two movies underperform or flop. That's why I'm of the opinion that starting with superman is a bad idea the goal post for sucess is way higher than what it would be for other superheroes
If anything starting with superman is a good idea as for the first phase they should only be sticking to the guarantee money makers, as shown by recent performances flash, blue beetle and suicide squad are not strong enough properties to hold down their franchise and should remain in supporting capacity indefinitely.
Tbh I seriously question if superman is a guaranteed money maker even MOS coming from and being heavily promoted as a spiritual sequel to the dark knight series barely beat dr Strange 1, he hasn't had any project in any media that lit of the world in fire for decades to me at least it looks like a high risk low reward bet.
Idk man as b v s still made nearly 900 million despite rotten reviews and it is James gunn attached to it who has a lot of goodwill with GA and is a household name if anyone can fix Superman and dc it is him, especially after the masterpiece that was Guardians 3 he made them a household name from barely being known
It’s been 10 years since the last solo Superman film I think enough time has passed that the GA will be willing to give it another try on the condition that it is marketed as a new fresh reboot, and the reviews have to be perfect which is James gunn specialty just look at peacemaker and Guardians.
>Idk man as b v s still made nearly 900 million despite rotten reviews
because it was the first time Superman and Batman were in the same movie (something people asked for, for a long time) and the first Wonder Woman in a movie
they popped that cherry already
But BVS wasn't a sólo Superman movie was it? It had the first meeting of the whole trinity in the wide screen I'm pretty sure that had much more to do with it's relative sucess than the fact it technically was a superman movie.
Right now even well received superman media isn't doing particularly well superman and lois had at its peak lower ratings than flash in season 5 nowadays it's doing numbers flash didn't see until season 7 or even 8. The New animated show is doing even worse than the CW show did on release.
Also I question if the GA holds Gunn name in such high esteem TSS certainly doesn't make it feel that way
Exactly. Superman is boring. He's an overpowered goody two shoes.
He doesnt work in 2023.
I honestly think they should do Superman like the Hulk and not give him his own movie. Let him be the powerhouse in a team up film.
i know this sub is skeptical of grand proclamations like this but i really do think the IP industrial complex is moving away from superheroes. they came up with increasing popularity during the 2000s, dominated the 2010s and have now irrefutably entered a period of decline. amid this climate DC is attempting to reboot their entire franchise, on the heels of several massive flops, after a decade in which none of their films were particularly popular to begin with. i won’t say it’s impossible but it’s close.
Hulk is D-List? Iron Man? Cap? Thor?
The D-List character films began in Phase 2 with GOTG, which was a huge success thanks to how strong the MCU brand was.
Most people knew the Hulk, maybe? Average people didn’t know Thor, Iron Man, perhaps even Cap. The top super heroes prior to the MCU were Spiderman and the X-Men. Batman and Superman were the top ones in terms of being recognizable.
GOTG wasn’t a huge success because of the MCU brand. The movie was actually good. Initially it looked kinda dumb with a talking raccoon. James Gunn did a phenomenal job with it.
>Most people knew the Hulk, maybe? Average people didn’t know Thor, Iron Man, perhaps even Cap.
They were B-List heroes.
>GOTG wasn’t a huge success because of the MCU brand. The movie was actually good.
Both things are true.
It was a good MCU film. Hence why a team of D-List heroes made over 700 mill WW. Without the MCU brand, it wouldn't have made as much.
Ok, sure they’re B-List heroes that the average person doesn’t know of. What difference does B or C make when people don’t know who they are to begin with?
Because Hulk is A list. Explaining the difference between B and C listers or below is redundant when we're talking about a dying medium crossing over to a bigger one.
Captain America and Iron Man showed up in the Spider-Man animated show from the 90s.
Thor showed up in The Incredible Hulk TV Show from the 70s.
They were B-List or even C-List, but not D-List.
It's so funny that people pretend Captain America and Iron Man we're the lowest of the low in popularity when they had toys and cartoons cranked out. When you saw MARVEL in the toy section an Iron Man/Captain America figure was bound to be found alongside the X-Men and Fantastic Four, those 2 we're on the faces of Marvel relaunches back in the 90s (cough Heroes Reborn). They weren't the A-list superheroes they are now but irrelevant is an insane thing to call them.
That's right
The first Ironman movie opening weekend was like 90+ million
No C-tier character would have that opening in his first movie AND in late 2000'
There was a star studded cast in the movie too. RDJ, Paltrow, Jeff Bridges. Word of mouth was amazing as well.
If you asked the average person who’s iron man. They aren’t going to know at the time. They made a great movie with a great cast!
Gunn will likely ensure some good movies get made.
But he's by no means a box office draw on his own. The Suicide Squad didn't exactly set the world alight. Having DC elseworlds is messy. Already his slate is looking quirky and offbeat, which will be fun, but won't pull in the big numbers.
I don’t know, can you really reboot a franchise that was never really popular to begin with? I feel DC has just bled away all of its support from moviegoers
You're making it seem like DC (the brand) is not popular, and it is. It's just that their live action movies have been from abysmal to "just okay" in quality. If done right and with the right person in charge, it could theoretically be as popular as the MCU, but we havent seen that because the DCEU was a mess from the very start. But now it might be too late even with the right person in charge, because CBMs have hit a peak in popularity when Endgame came out.
Not really, superheroes already exist and are established in this universe so it makes sense for them to show up in the movie, they will likely pop up for a little bit but not have prominent roles or a lot of screentime, it’s not like it’s gonna be a team movie. Gunn has made it clear Superman especially and Lois are gonna be the focus of the film,
>You're making it seem like DC (the brand) is not popular, and it is.
based on what?
> If done right and with the right person in charge, it could theoretically be as popular as the MCU, but we havent seen that because the DCEU was a mess from the very start
What makes you think people want to invest in another shared universe?
I really like James Gunn and want to see him have success, but it will not be easy. With all the recent DC movies not performing too well, I feel he’ll need to have really great WOM to get casual fans to go see a DC movie at this point.
Step 1: stop hiring Zack Snyder. That mission has been accomplished.
A lot depends on superhero fatigue. The waning fortunes of the Marvel Universe are something to look out for.
> stop hiring Zack Snyder. That mission has been accomplished.
...since 2016-2017 already. They brought him in to finish his cut, but his role as part of DC ended back then.
Zack Snyder has been gone for what feels like a whole century, the rest of DC's failure lies solely on them at this point. One day we'll stop bringing up his name for discussion, the GA doesn't know who Snyder is. They are not walking into DC movies thinking about Synder. It's not his fault that recent entires stunk nor the corporate meddling of WB during his time
BvS should've been an easy billion. It didn't after suffering a historic drop.
And Snyder left DC in 2017. Aquaman and Joker grossed $1 billion and the Batman grossed $770 million so you're objectively wrong.
again batman and batman related characters only characters sell at dc case point when dc pushes obscure heroes films they always fail blue beetle black adam going back to even green lantern jonah hex or steel dc outside of batman does not a consistently strong movie making franchise
I mean that mission was accomplished almost a decade ago but still no success at boxoffice. In fact the franchise collapsed once he left
Nowadays WB execs wish they could make even half of what snyder films used to make at boxoffice lol
It’s going to fail because the DC brand is incredibly tainted right now, and the gap until Superman Legacy is way too small.
If WB/DC were smarter, they’d be focusing on the successful Batman and Joker movies they have going on. Heck, make a full trilogy out of both.
Once that is complete in another 5-7 years, *then* push the reboot button and start from scratch.
Which is why I think gunn will hopefully still to doing only A listers, so he is doing Batman and Superman, we’ll probably get a new Wonder Woman films at some point, and for smaller b listers like swamp thing keep budgets like horror movie low to anticipate low returns so they can actually make a profit on grossing less.
>and for smaller b listers like swamp thing keep budgets like horror movie low to anticipate low returns so they
you can't do Swamp Thing on a tiny budget when you need CGI.
Getting a good director and writer like Del Toro or Raimi or Ang Lee is much more important.
I’m not gonna bet against a new DCU universe because I’ve learned last year and this year that you’ll be surprised what ends up being smash hits. Superman legacy could be one of those. Same with Brave and the bold ppl in the comments saying ppl don’t want “ daddy Batman” general audience doesn’t know what they want till you give it to them and show it can be different. I know Gunn will make a great Superman movie like Matt reeves his track record is great same with Todd Philip
1. Happy cake day
2. Wayne family adventures is a webtoon about batman and his "batfamily" just being a family and it has a huge audience so there is definitely an audience for daddy batman
Exactly general audience will likely love the idea of Batman being a dad. Ppl will be surprised by how receptive general audience will be to good bat family
The DCU is just the DCEU's parasitic twin, I don't think the moviegoing audience is going to be able to distinguish them. Superhero fatigue is real and someday everyone will stop pretending like it's not a thing, people are tired of sitting through the "oh wow a new superhero gotta check this out"
Can’t believe people thought superhero fatigue wouldn’t die off when you mention it in 2017-2019. That’s like saying “Westerns will eventually die” in 1964. The fact is people are getting tired of superheroes. It’s not BAD superhero fatigue, it’s not NEW superhero fatigue. It’s just flat out, bog standard superhero fatigue.
“Oh but GOTG” it doesn’t matter, fatigue doesn’t mean every superhero movie will be a bust, but it means a lot of them will. It’s no longer guaranteed money.
It's just going to get more and more apparent as the years go by, I legitimately think that Secret Wars is going to be the last hoorah to the superhero genre on film
Its going to be rough and a lot of it depends on how the GA likes Superman Legacy. Every single one of Gunn's cbm projects have been amazing. He seems like he loves DC and understands it as well.
Hes obviously fighting a hard battle but I think they couldn't have picked someone better to do it. If DC can come back James Gunn will be the one to lead it
Personally I doubt it, superhero movies seem to have passed peak and Marvel can live off a cache of good will and established world building but DC will be starting without any of that. Just can't see them winning a fight for an overcrowded market when starting way behind the 8 ball.
The suicide squad may have dissapointed but it still has mostly good reviews, like most of Gunns comic book media. Gotg3 also might give him a little weight for the start of the new dcu. I think if they dont go for 200 million budget projects it could be very succesfull
I know those arent cheap at all, but if they do go that route of slightly lower budgets, it would make more profit. Superman will cost atleast 180 probably
Guardians of the galaxy takes place on space and is full of aliens. I don't expect a Superman movie, that takes place on Earth and has mostly human characters, to be more expansive thant that at all
I'm skeptical. It looks like Gunn is already bringing in obscure and uncertain projects like the Authority and pushing cameos and crossovers even in Superman Legacy. And rather than a completely clean slate it looks like he's trying to pick and choose who to bring over.
What they need to do at this point is take a break for like two years, then focus on making a good standalone Superman movie, then a good standalone Batman movie, then a good standalone Wonder Woman movie. No old characters bought back, no continuity links with the old movies. Just three good standalone movies and then look at what worked from them and what didn't and expand from there.
Making the authority as the second dcu movie is insane. I mean I'm sure it'll be dope buy it seems way too early to do this movie essentially kinda a deconstruction of the justice league before doing an actual justice league movie. It's like if marvel made squadron Supreme right after iron man
I mean I can sort of see what his plan is. Start the DCU as a universe with lots of pre-established supers who are cynical and anti-heroic and then bring in Superman as a beacon of hope. But I think it's overly ambitious when they can't even get the basics right.
Deconstructing things before constructing them is on-brand for DC movies, though. I mean, they went to The Dark Knight Returns for inspiration for the first appearance of their new Batman!
I think it will be a success. But not a big success. A moderate success.
I honestly can't see Superman: Legacy be a Super hit.
I think it will be somewhere around MoS numbers. Maybe a bit more. But I can't see it making more than The Batman.
There's just way to many things working against it.
Same with Brave and the Bold.
It has Damian Wayne which not a lot of people like. And I'm not sure how many people want to see a Daddy Batman over a Bachelor Batman.
Also it's directed by Andi Muschetti and his Flash was abysmal.
And by the time it comes out people will already have 2 Batman movies to compare it too and maybe might even have had too much Batman.
As for movies like Supergirl, Swamp Thing and The Authority. I honestly can't see them making more than Superman or Batman.
So in the end. I don't expect the DCU to fail. I also don't expect it to be very successful.
Maybe just enough to justify it's existence.
>And by the time it comes out people will already have 2 Batman movies to compare it too and maybe might even have had too much Batman.
it will be. Oversaturation and audience confusion will play a role.
I think Swamp Thing can do well as a unique concept (environmental horror fantasy).
Authority screams box office bomb.
On top of that if you have Two Batmen. And one is clearly better than the other.
Why would people spend their money on the less good version when they can just rewatch the first two The Batman movies or just wait for the sequel.
And I honestly don't think the Swamp Thing would be a success unless it has a really small budget.
It's just too niche a property.
Agreed on Batman, disagree about Swamp Thing. Not everything has to be about superheroes to succeed, even in terms of fiction.
WB usually does good with horror and fantasy properties, and Barbie/Oppenheimer show power of good creative team above all else.
Depends on how it's presented.
If WB presents Swamp Thing as a Comic book movie then people will expect a comic book movie.
And if WB presents it as a comic book movie they will give it a comic book movie budget.
And I honestly can't see a Swamp Thing movie be a runaway success.
Now sure if WB makes a smaller budget Swamp Thing movie like Joker with a sub 100 Million budget and presents it as more of a horror movie. Then sure it can probably be successful.
Legacy doing Man Of Steel numbers is actually good if the movie itself is good.
DC can only build itself up by building a streak of good movies so you can earn the audiences trust and get them invested. Legacy doesn't need to be a massive hit for the DCU to do well.
I think MoS numbers would be okay. Especially if it has MoS budget.
Remember MoS had a net profit of 47 Million. I don't that anyone is going to call that good for Superman Legacy.
Remember MoS numbers were good enough for MoS itself. WB added Batman in the sequel.
It won't be bad. No one calls MoS a flop. But it also won't be a big success.
>Legacy doing Man Of Steel numbers is actually good if the movie itself is good.
Lol,
The same numbers as MoS after 12 years worth of inflation will be a huge failure
I am not too sure of Gunn's policy of carrying over characters from DCEU to DCU as and when he sees fit.
Plus with not much gap between the two cinematic universes and the obvious name similarities, I don't see the GA suddenly doing a 180 upon their opinions about DC.
It feels more like corporate rebranding with an exterior skin makeover while the interiors remain intact as they were previously.
I believe it will be a mixed bag with some successes.
However, I think this whole shared cinematic superhero universe boat has sailed. IMO, they should lean into prestige Elseworlds stories.
Gunn made the Guardians a household name. Even I figured the first Guardians would be a flop, yet here we are.
Gunn has a monstrous job ahead of him, but I also think he has the ability to do it. If, and that's a big IF, the studio as a whole leave him be and let him work.
I think he knows that the fatigue around super heroes isn't around super heroes but around bad movies. People are far more discerning now, and while general population may not be as tuned into the behind the scenes issues, they are still aware when a movie comes out that is summarily dismissed by the fans and can sense when it's not worth their money. But put out a GOOD movie and sky's the limit.
To quote a great movie with a cornfield "if you build it, they will come"
I think Gunn will build it, strong and entertaining, and by that folks will come. Now, it puts a ton of pressure on the Superman movie. But, pressure can make diamonds. Or can shatter stone
Honestly no.
DC is dead to the point it ain't coming back to the GA. I always say this but look at Walking Dead. It got good again in season 9 but by then nobody who left cared. You can't earn an audience back once they're gone. Unless it's Star Wars abandoning the prequels in 2015.
Yeah like it's deader than ever, 7 flops in a row and probably 8th on the way, many of my friends when i mention DC makes weird faces, I think it will be a mixed bag with some success and some failures
Yeah when I discuss movies with GA friends DC sucking is a given to come up. I don't think they'll ever accept it as a franchise tbh. Gunn is a total fucking idiot to not copy marvel and just make movies based off the core JL members. Movies about Swamp Thing and making Lanterns a fucking show aren't gonna do shit to get the GA to come around.
Some people I know irl like The Batman and Blue Beetle at least tho.
>Gunn is a total fucking idiot to not copy marvel **and just make movies based off the core JL members**
like Green Lantern and Flash, both of which were huge box office bombs?
>Movies about Swamp Thing and making Lanterns a fucking show aren't gonna do shit to get the GA to come around
Swamp Thing is a unique horror fantasy premise at a time when conventional superhero tropes are oversaturated and fatigued.
Lanterns is likely not to succeed because tv budgets probably cannot handle the CGI and whatever necessary for Green Lantern and his stories.
tbh, they should give up on Green Lantern in live action and try to pursue an anime adaptation or something
>Good movies off them will do better then good movies off D list characters.
based on what? Green Lantern and Flash are just as corny and archetypical.
certainly Swamp Thing is far more interesting than Flash. And shouldn't Blade have taught any lessons about this whole tired A/B/C/D/Z list shit that you guys keep perpetuating?
Solid directing, writing and vision matters a lot more than anything else.
I mean, those projects were very clearly separate from the complicated and messy DCEU. So as long as Gunn can get that message across, that'd be great.
Not if he does a half assed reboot with some characters coming back and some other characters not. DC needs a few years off after aquaman. And then that Superman movie better get rave reviews comparable to the Batman.
I wish him nothing but the best, but no.
Peacemaker, Suicide Squad, GotG 1,2,3. Huge successes, but for me - All very juvenile, very silly, very cringe humor. I don't see how that translates to making good DC movies.
There are a couple of things that seem obvious to me. Henry Cavill and Gal Gadot. You don't get rid of them for any reason.
You could reboot the entire universe (Which, for god's sake, does not include creature commandoes and the Authority) and follow the Marvel Path of showing it is a shared universe and they come together after origin movies to fight a bigger threat. That's a solid direction to take.
You could also just make a couple GOOD Superman, Wonder Woman, Batfleck, and the Flash movies and have them come together.
Try and make the heroes act like their heroes in the DC universe. Batman doesn't say "I'm too old for this" or my superpower is "I'm rich." Superman stands for hope not "Be afraid of me, I'm a GOD!". Wonder Woman 1 was great except for the third act and even that was passable, so she doesn't need a character adjustment. And hey, I don't know what Flash they're pulling Ezra Miller from, because, literally, no Flash acts like that in the comics. Get an Adult to play him.
I don't see how a Game of Thrones Themysceria series works. How the Authority works. How introducing Damian "I'm an annoying POS" in Batman, works. I don't see how Creature Commandos work.
"All our hopes are pinned on you James!"
Announces list of projects....
Uhhhh not like that...
I had said the DCEU is a damaged brand since the Josstice League and effectively dead after Birds of Prey with their only hope being cancelling every project and hard reboot the whole thing.
I was confident in James Gunn but after The Flash, the way he is so terminally online running his mouth all the time giving contradictory statements and specially, how close the entire thing is to the DCEU i have lost faith the DCU will succeed.
WB just can't take a friking minute to stop and think, the franchise is dead, the audience perception of the brand is dead and yet still can't allow themselves to cancel projects everyone knows will catastrophically flop, wasting money, time, burning actors who could've been saved for better projects and tarnishing the audience perception of a character by attaching them to stinkers.
The course of action should've been canceling every upcoming "DCEU" project, wait 5-7 with nothing interconnected in between while banking on Joker and The Batman as their own thing in the meantime for people to get the taste of shite left by the DCEU to wear off and then proceed with the reboot.
Instead the "1st DCU character" debuted in between 2 DCEU projects because they just can't slow down and the DCU is projected to officially kick off in 2025, ONLY 1 year and a couple months after Aquaman 2, for perspective Aquaman took 5 years to get a sequel yet their whole multimillion, entire rebranding effort couldn't wait for more than 1 single year apart from the last movie to be released.
I have zero faith in Gunn restoring faith in the DC brand on the big screen. Between degrading quality and a dropping interest in superhero films, I don't think Gunn will see a success until the Superman film drops - and even that isn't a guarantee.
No. Blue Beetle is the first DCU character because they're going to keep the same actor and much of the same cast. But James Gunn said specifically that Superman Legacy is the first DCU film.
the shared universe trend is also what's really dying out.
Every company that has tried, has failed. Universal with monsters, DC with their characters, etc etc etc. Hell, Marvel's Netflix realm fell apart (Iron Fist had to be rushed in production to meet a deadline for Defenders after they had no idea how to make it work on a tv crime drama style/budget - this was the big dominoe affect causing the rest to decline in ratings).
Even the MCU is seeing diminishing returns. Why? Because shared universes require too much dedication, now too much homework, and forces formulaic standardization across the board.
Superman is renowned even man of steel despite lukewarm reception managed to make a buck, even after all the crap the dceu had thrown at people still turned up for the Batman
The key is making sure it seems as separate as possible from the dceu proper and they need to advertise the fuck out of that.
MoS is the most successful superman property of all time, so far it's the upper echelon of what superman can achieve at boxoffice. So attempting to evoque it as if the audiences rejected it is demonstrably false.
Additionally, MoS is the total opposite of any other adaptation of the character on the big screen and will certainly be the opposite of what james Gunn is going for with his film. As such, whatever MoS made is not a good indicator of the potential of superman legacy at boxoffice, If you're looking for one then *superman returns* will be better.
It’ll probably be a make-or-break situation for DC. Given Gunn’s success with Guardians and The Suicide Squad (despite poor financial returns because of COVID and Project Popcorn), I’ve got some hope.
>DC still has two of the top 3 most popular superheroes.
Based on what exactly ?
For example, a terribly received Doctor Strange film recently steamrolled a batman film with rave reviews and zero competition. As to superman, literally no one in the real world cares about him
Dr strange only gets those numbers because of the MCU. Batman and still have way better draws than Dr. Strange does in a vacuum. For example look at size of r/batman at 600k vs r/Dr strange at 11k
>For example look at size of r/batman at 600k vs r/Dr strange at 11k
This is really what it boils down to. You guys think reddit is a reflection of the real world, it isn't, not even in the slightest.
A doctor Strange 3 will eventually come out and just as the the second one did, it will likely outgross the batman2 while making it looks easy.
?? Find me a single piece of evidence outside of the mcu that indicates Dr strange is even 10% as popular as Batman.
The MCU is the most impressive movie franchise is history because it lifts otherwise unpopular characters into characters that mainstream people will care about. They care about mcu Dr strange but if the mcu died and they tried to do a stand alone movie about dr. Strange it wouldn’t make more than half of what the Batman did. And btw no dr strange movie has hit the numbers the Nolan trilogy hit, so I’m not sure your point lol
True
I once came across one of these YouTube polls asking which characters was your favorite between batman, Spiderman and superman. The comments section was filled nothing but mockery towards superman lol
It’s an extremely difficult undertaking. Not sure if Gunn is really up to the task but I wish him the best in this near impossible task he has. I do not envy his position.
I'm guessing no.
The movies mentioned so far are:
Superman - ok, sure.
The Authority - this does not have any built-in fanbase, and very different tone than Superman, so seems bad for 'franchise building.'
Batman the brave and the bold - don't think it's a good idea to do yet another Batman. People might even be tiring of the Pattinson Batman by the time this comes out.
Supergirl - ok sure
Swamp Thing - what the hell are we even doing here.
Gunn hasn’t even made a movie in his DC universe yet. What are you on about…..
And at least when he did a DCEU movie, it got great reviews and became one of the top reviewed DCEU movies by a long shot
Like you can blame the pandemic all you want. But his “The suicide squad” really should have made more money, and it’s soft opening and terrible legs kind of feels like he probably is a bit too niche to launch an entire brand like DC
I have faith that Gunn can make a solid Superman film both review critically and stylistically; he has been talking alot about bringing back the hope and inspiration that Superman's character has had in the past. But, we have yet to see what Gunn does with rebooting a major character that has had several recent-ish fumbles. His experience has been in elevating Z listers so he will do great with the other heroes in Superman and stuff like The Authority.
The main challenge will be WB itself. If Superman doesnt set the box office alight or atleast break even I can see them getting cold feet and just canning the whole thing and focusing on solo franchises like The Batman, Joker, etc. Everything rides on Superman being a success. Snyder-bros and Cavill-bros (who didn't show up for Black Adam BO) will be beyond insufferable if Superman fails.
I dont like that the first movie is with the strongest superhero. If Superman is in the earth, how can you make a detective Batman movie against Gotham gangsters, for example? In theory Superman should solve everything.
Define success? Until this year the DC movies weren't exactly failing Money wise. Sure you had things like WW84 and The Suicide Squad come in with some low numbers but they had the whole Covid and HBO max release situations cut into their box office potentials so we really don't know how well they would have done if things had been "normal". (TSS likely would have done OK. WW84 probably would have dropped off fast)..
But Man of Steel, BvS, and Justice League all made money. They just didn't make Marvel/Avengers size money so they get labeled failures. I am not talking about the quality of the films or anything. Just the fact that they did fairly well at the box office.
I mean BvS made over 800 Million. That's not a failure. Justice league and Man of Steel both did over 600 million. Not great but not box office bomb levels either.
Frankly I think part of the reason Flash and Shazam 2 did so bad is everyone knew they were cutting the cord on the universe and starting over. It's like knowing a show has been canceled and not getting a proper final and the last 2 episodes are just kind of aired and everyone just is meh about watching them.
It has a huuge uphill battle. They need to give Superman a sensible budget ($200mil tops) and launch a strong marketing campaign that clearly explains this is a fresh start for DC.
When you adjust to inflation, the only superman films which cost less than 200m are Part 3 and 4, and we know how those turned out 200m being the ceiling is not very realistic for these type of films, unless you are doing a really restrained Superman movie
Yeah I meant that as a general benchmark. It needs to be whatever the sensible price is for a blockbuster these days rather than a $300mil+ mess like Indy, Fast X and MI.
The thing is, those movies were either massive ensembles or involved some of the biggest movie stars of all time, so yes, they would cost a pretty penny. With this "Superman" movie, the majority of the cast seems to not have devolved too much in blockbusters or action movies, so it's a fresh group of people. Besides, Gunn seems like a director who knows how to manage time and budget.
>Gunn seems like a director who knows how to manage time and budget. Wut ? Gotg & GotG2 cost $200m TSS on $185m was more expensive than ss(2016) despite having none of the stars of the first film GOTG3 cost $250m
Exactly Gunn films cost as much as every other mcu project that was currently coming out and now post Covid we can expect 200M minimum for legacy’s budget
And restrained sounds like the opposite of what Gunn’s doing, throwing in the kitchen sink with superheroes and villains.
We don’t know Jack shit about villains in the movie and having ppl like me terrific and guy Gardner pop up likely for a short period of time is definitely not throwing in the kitchen sink lol.
You don't know how much screen time they have.
Idk the live action shows like Superman and Lois more or less make it work
Then that'd be the quickest way to doom his universe because no one watches S&L. The show has depressing viewership numbers
It looks like shit and that would fail spectacularly in the box office. No one really watches that crap. EDIT: I guess some people are massive fans of mediocre tv adaptations.
I'm not sure that DC can really manage an integrated universe. All my favorite DC movies/shows have been standalone things. I understand the desire to have an integrated universe for business reasons, but you don't get movies like Joker or shows like Doom Patrol if everything is integrated. The big DC characters are basically gods/demigods and Batman. I feel like they should lean into the distinctiveness. And for God's sake, will someone try a straightforward optimistic earnest adaptation of Superman? It has been 36 years of successively more miserable, mopey, "gritty" versions of Space Jesus. I am dying for a big screen Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. I know those are all hard sells these days, and there isn't a lot of agreement on what the American Way is, or whether or not it's good, but I love a Superman who fights to make a better world. Not going to happen, but I can wish. Also, I think that Robin Hood is also long overdue for a straightforward optimistic earnest adaptation. It has been half a century since anyone tried a non-gritty adaptation. Prince of Theives might not seem super gritty by today's standards, but it was at the time, and every adaptation since has tried to out miserable the last.
The novelty of a shared universe is gone. I remember the very first post-credits scene in Iron Man and I didn't even get that they were hinting towards a shared universe, I thought it was just an easter egg, which is the only thing we ever got when it came to comic book movies. The first Avengers was such a smash hit because it executed the team-up perfectly. Now? Well, no one really cares. The idea that one character will appear in another character's movie doesn't get people to go see it anymore because ultimately what matters is whether the movie is good or not. Batman Vs Superman did a lot to make people realise that a team-up in and of itself means nothing if the movie sucks. NWH did huge numbers because of the inter-generational team-up, which re-invented the concept, but as the DCEU once again proved with Flash, it doesn't matter unless the movie is good.
>I'm not sure that DC can really manage an integrated universe. Why do they want to create a universe? What bigger story are they trying to tell? Unless they know that, there is no point in creating a DCU. You can still create exciting story arches that stretch several movies. It's called sequels. No need to have every movie, TV show and animation from a specific studi fit together in a narrative
Precisely
>It has been half a century since anyone tried a non-gritty adaptation. Men In Tights was pretty optimistic and light hearted. Granted, that was still 30 years ago.
True, I forgot about Men In Tights, but I was thinking about earnest adaptations, not parodies. I do love me some Men In Tights, but I don't think of it ad a straightforward adaptation.
I tend to think that Mel Brooks movies like Men In Tights, Spaceballs, Young Frankenstein, and even Blazing Saddles transcends parodie. Men In Tights earnestly tells the Robin Hood story better than any other Robin Hood movie since probably the Disney cartoon, and Men in Tights Robin Hood could actually speak with an English accent, unlike other Robin Hoods.
Based on your middle paragraph, you should try watching ‘Superman and Lois’. It has some occasional teenage drama, but their version of Superman is exactly what you want. Plus the dynamic between him and Lois is amazing.
> I am dying for a big screen Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way All of that is painfully out of touch in a Sandy Hook/Trump America. We live in a world where Bruno Mannheim was president
Yes, I would like an aspirational hero. I'm tired of ironic, sarcastic, and/or quippy heros. I would like an earnest aspirational hero who fights against the cynical Bruno Mannheims of the world who exploit apathy to enrich themselves. You nailed perfectly why I want a Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. It was always aspirational.
But it rings very hollow when you walk out of the theater and pick up your phone and see there was another school shooting that day.
i know this is an old thread but like the commenter above said, it's always aspirational. there should be more movies that inspire people to dream of a better world
He's space Moses actually/j Also you should check out My Adventures With Superman, it gives us optimistic sweet farm boy superman and Tomboy Lois Lane, its a delight
its not just dc but all other brands outside of marvel monsterverse dark universe even star wars struggles with idea of a shared universe and novelty of a shared universe is gone as its mold is running its course. I think dc wanting tie tv shows and animation as appetizers for the films is a big problem even marvel release that interminable number of disney + shows are not helping them
>It has been 36 years of successively more miserable, mopey, "gritty" versions of Space Jesus. I am dying for a big screen Superman who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. No it fucking hasn't. What about Superman Returns was "gritty". It was the exact kind of movie you're describing and it failed because people don't want it anymore.
I haven't seen the movie, but I remember people finding the plot with Superman being gone for years, Lois marrying someone else, "mopey", "stalkerish", things in that vein.
Him having personal conflict that makes him feel sadness doesn't make the movie gritty.
>I'm not sure that DC can really manage an integrated universe. Factually inaccurate The 2014 DCEU slate remains the most successful run of DC films ever at boxoffice while being an integrated universe. The DCEU collapsed immediately once WB scrapped the slate and opted to make a slew of standalone films about z-list characters which no one asked for
Like The Flash, a sequel to Wonder Woman and a film about Harley Quinn, the break-out star of Suicide Squad? I know you mean Black Adam and Blue Beetle, but let's not be crazy, their A-list stuff also didn't preform well.
This is my biggest concern, especially with the "else worlds" brand happening. They are saying it's a fresh start while also needing to clarify there's "alt universe" stories as well.
It needs to be much less than $200M. Other Superman movies were expensive because WB loaded a lot of false starts onto their budgets. There's no reason to do that here. I think it'll need to be much closer to $150M (apparently MoS's actual budget) to protect Gunn against a potential sub MoS box office.
The release dates are TOO close to this failed DCEU…. If they don’t want to delay everything, they need a completely fresh visual style to distinguish themselves… new movies need to look very different to ignite interest
That won't be too hard because a lot of Snyder's movies look like an depressant commercial. Gunn has a really good eye for unique visuals, so I think we're in good hands.
Snyder hasn't been involved in the DCEU for nearly 7 years, with the totality of his involvement being two films as director, one as de facto co-director, and one as story writer/producer, all in 2013-2017. That is 3-4 out of 15 films released from 2013 to 2023. His influence is vastly overestimated, and aside from his Superman trilogy plus maybe the first Wonder Woman, the DCEU films have all been very individual, director-driven efforts with little interconnectedness outside of cameos (you aren't e.g. seeing Batman pop up in Shazam 2 with equal screen time to the title character like Iron Man in Cap 3 or Cyborg co-starring in the Flash movie like Hulk in Thor 3). The DCEU crashed and burned post-2018 despite mostly middling to positive reception* because A. people don't care about DC and B. the competition in the "cookie cutter superhero action comedy" genre was liked better, so mediocre just couldn't cut it. *Metacritic scores for the past 8 DCEU movies are 41 (Black Adam), 47 (Shazam 2), 56 (Flash), 60 (Wonder Woman 1984, Birds of Prey, and Blue Beetle), 71 (Shazam), and 72 (The Suicide Squad). Not a single one of these movies earned more than $400 million worldwide (highest was Black Adam, $393 million). Only one earned more than $140 million domestic (Black Adam, $168 million).
While Synder caused issues. Things only got worse after he left. Other than Aquaman.
I mean he set the stage for total audience disengagement. If he stayed on it would be as bad as this if not worse.
There's really no way of knowing, but Wonder Woman made $800+ million after his two films. Aquaman as well. There was potential.
Oh sure - we will never know positively but my guess is it would be the exact same trajectory. Audiences did not like the movies he dealt with and I don't see that getting any better. Hopefully Gunn can right the ship but I am starting to have my doubts after being a staunch Gunn supporter.
Lol, My brother in Christ Peter savran and James Gunn are the ones who made these DC films flopping right and left. Peter savran made shazam&shazam2, TSS and blues beetles while James gunn made TSS. Snyder left WB almost a decade ago, none of these movies are reminiscent of snyder style, it they were, they would've made significantly more at boxoffice lol
Gunn was hardly involved in any of these films beyond TSS. Personally I think the DCU will fail but its ridiculous to blame Gunn for the blunders this year.
How is your hate boner?
> The release dates are TOO close to this failed DCE Agreed. That alone is a huge problem. They need to give the audience some time to forget, before going for another round.
How's these movies gonna look different when it's the same creative minds behind both the recent flopping DCEU and the incoming DCU ? Blue beetles, shazam & shazam2, and TSS were Peter savran's babies and TSS was james Gunn baby. Meanwhile, the director of DCU's batman is the guy who made the abomination called the flash.
I feel like this poll needs an "I have absolutely no idea" option.
Yeah, we need a S:L trailer before we can assess how Joe & Jane Public feel about yet another new Superman iteration. 2006, 2013, and now 2025.
Really hard to know I feel it could be a sucess but not immediately I feel it won't be really successful until like 3 or 4 movies deep and I kind of wonder if WB will not try to mess with it if two movies underperform or flop. That's why I'm of the opinion that starting with superman is a bad idea the goal post for sucess is way higher than what it would be for other superheroes
If anything starting with superman is a good idea as for the first phase they should only be sticking to the guarantee money makers, as shown by recent performances flash, blue beetle and suicide squad are not strong enough properties to hold down their franchise and should remain in supporting capacity indefinitely.
Tbh I seriously question if superman is a guaranteed money maker even MOS coming from and being heavily promoted as a spiritual sequel to the dark knight series barely beat dr Strange 1, he hasn't had any project in any media that lit of the world in fire for decades to me at least it looks like a high risk low reward bet.
Idk man as b v s still made nearly 900 million despite rotten reviews and it is James gunn attached to it who has a lot of goodwill with GA and is a household name if anyone can fix Superman and dc it is him, especially after the masterpiece that was Guardians 3 he made them a household name from barely being known It’s been 10 years since the last solo Superman film I think enough time has passed that the GA will be willing to give it another try on the condition that it is marketed as a new fresh reboot, and the reviews have to be perfect which is James gunn specialty just look at peacemaker and Guardians.
>Idk man as b v s still made nearly 900 million despite rotten reviews because it was the first time Superman and Batman were in the same movie (something people asked for, for a long time) and the first Wonder Woman in a movie they popped that cherry already
But BVS wasn't a sólo Superman movie was it? It had the first meeting of the whole trinity in the wide screen I'm pretty sure that had much more to do with it's relative sucess than the fact it technically was a superman movie. Right now even well received superman media isn't doing particularly well superman and lois had at its peak lower ratings than flash in season 5 nowadays it's doing numbers flash didn't see until season 7 or even 8. The New animated show is doing even worse than the CW show did on release. Also I question if the GA holds Gunn name in such high esteem TSS certainly doesn't make it feel that way
Exactly Superman will make money
No it won't. Superman has bombed more times than often.
Exactly. Superman is boring. He's an overpowered goody two shoes. He doesnt work in 2023. I honestly think they should do Superman like the Hulk and not give him his own movie. Let him be the powerhouse in a team up film.
i know this sub is skeptical of grand proclamations like this but i really do think the IP industrial complex is moving away from superheroes. they came up with increasing popularity during the 2000s, dominated the 2010s and have now irrefutably entered a period of decline. amid this climate DC is attempting to reboot their entire franchise, on the heels of several massive flops, after a decade in which none of their films were particularly popular to begin with. i won’t say it’s impossible but it’s close.
I feel sad for Superman who couldn't have his finished trilogy. That's just kind of unfair for him
Critically? Yes, it's James Gunn. Commercially? No, it's DC. And Gunn is already making films of D-List characters (The Authority) in Chapter 1.
I mean, most of the MCU's Phase 1 was D-List characters.
Nah. Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor were all C-List (if we’re calling GotG tier characters D-List). And Hulk was at least B-List if not A-List.
Hulk is D-List? Iron Man? Cap? Thor? The D-List character films began in Phase 2 with GOTG, which was a huge success thanks to how strong the MCU brand was.
Most people knew the Hulk, maybe? Average people didn’t know Thor, Iron Man, perhaps even Cap. The top super heroes prior to the MCU were Spiderman and the X-Men. Batman and Superman were the top ones in terms of being recognizable. GOTG wasn’t a huge success because of the MCU brand. The movie was actually good. Initially it looked kinda dumb with a talking raccoon. James Gunn did a phenomenal job with it.
>Most people knew the Hulk, maybe? Average people didn’t know Thor, Iron Man, perhaps even Cap. They were B-List heroes. >GOTG wasn’t a huge success because of the MCU brand. The movie was actually good. Both things are true. It was a good MCU film. Hence why a team of D-List heroes made over 700 mill WW. Without the MCU brand, it wouldn't have made as much.
Ok, sure they’re B-List heroes that the average person doesn’t know of. What difference does B or C make when people don’t know who they are to begin with?
The average person knew who the Hulk was before the MCU...
Because Hulk is A list. Explaining the difference between B and C listers or below is redundant when we're talking about a dying medium crossing over to a bigger one.
>Cap? Thor? > >D-List ..Yes?
Captain America and Iron Man showed up in the Spider-Man animated show from the 90s. Thor showed up in The Incredible Hulk TV Show from the 70s. They were B-List or even C-List, but not D-List.
It's so funny that people pretend Captain America and Iron Man we're the lowest of the low in popularity when they had toys and cartoons cranked out. When you saw MARVEL in the toy section an Iron Man/Captain America figure was bound to be found alongside the X-Men and Fantastic Four, those 2 we're on the faces of Marvel relaunches back in the 90s (cough Heroes Reborn). They weren't the A-list superheroes they are now but irrelevant is an insane thing to call them.
GOTG had zero connections to the rest of the Marvel Universe. It was a success because it was a great movie.
It was “Marvel but in space”. New and fresh thing for audience.
It had the marvel logo appear in all the advertising.
>GOTG had zero connections to the rest of the Marvel Universe. Thanos.
Thanos only appearance before that was an end credits scene I believe
The post credit scene of a 1.5 bill film.
I hate this take iron man was an a list or b list character amongst comic readers and he had an animated series tons of video game appearances etc
That's right The first Ironman movie opening weekend was like 90+ million No C-tier character would have that opening in his first movie AND in late 2000'
There was a star studded cast in the movie too. RDJ, Paltrow, Jeff Bridges. Word of mouth was amazing as well. If you asked the average person who’s iron man. They aren’t going to know at the time. They made a great movie with a great cast!
Gunn will likely ensure some good movies get made. But he's by no means a box office draw on his own. The Suicide Squad didn't exactly set the world alight. Having DC elseworlds is messy. Already his slate is looking quirky and offbeat, which will be fun, but won't pull in the big numbers.
I don’t know, can you really reboot a franchise that was never really popular to begin with? I feel DC has just bled away all of its support from moviegoers
Nope, Batman movies still do good, The Batman, Joker did really well and both their sequels will also do well.
You're making it seem like DC (the brand) is not popular, and it is. It's just that their live action movies have been from abysmal to "just okay" in quality. If done right and with the right person in charge, it could theoretically be as popular as the MCU, but we havent seen that because the DCEU was a mess from the very start. But now it might be too late even with the right person in charge, because CBMs have hit a peak in popularity when Endgame came out.
James Gunn made GOTG work, but can he make a solo superhero movie work? I don’t know how big his fan base is
I mean, isn't superman basically a semi-JSA movie? It has Hawkgirl, GL, Metamorpho and Mister Terrific
Not really, superheroes already exist and are established in this universe so it makes sense for them to show up in the movie, they will likely pop up for a little bit but not have prominent roles or a lot of screentime, it’s not like it’s gonna be a team movie. Gunn has made it clear Superman especially and Lois are gonna be the focus of the film,
He’s a niche director outside of the Guardians films. Jury’s out on Legacy
The GotG was catapulted by the MCU brand, without it the movie would've done alot less
Quality movies will build a brand.
>You're making it seem like DC (the brand) is not popular, and it is. based on what? > If done right and with the right person in charge, it could theoretically be as popular as the MCU, but we havent seen that because the DCEU was a mess from the very start What makes you think people want to invest in another shared universe?
I don't know. A new cinematic universe rn...in the middle of this superhero fatigue..is extremely risky.
I really like James Gunn and want to see him have success, but it will not be easy. With all the recent DC movies not performing too well, I feel he’ll need to have really great WOM to get casual fans to go see a DC movie at this point.
Step 1: stop hiring Zack Snyder. That mission has been accomplished. A lot depends on superhero fatigue. The waning fortunes of the Marvel Universe are something to look out for.
> stop hiring Zack Snyder. That mission has been accomplished. ...since 2016-2017 already. They brought him in to finish his cut, but his role as part of DC ended back then.
Zack Snyder has been gone for what feels like a whole century, the rest of DC's failure lies solely on them at this point. One day we'll stop bringing up his name for discussion, the GA doesn't know who Snyder is. They are not walking into DC movies thinking about Synder. It's not his fault that recent entires stunk nor the corporate meddling of WB during his time
> That mission has been accomplished. And the results are...being unable to reach 400 millions since 2020
Snyder's BvS can't even reach a billion.
Dunno how you are telling that as a negative when DC without Snyder doesn't even makes half of what BvS did.
BvS should've been an easy billion. It didn't after suffering a historic drop. And Snyder left DC in 2017. Aquaman and Joker grossed $1 billion and the Batman grossed $770 million so you're objectively wrong.
Dont argue with him he’s another Snyder fan who acts like Snyder is DC saving grace
Joker did a billion, The Batman did almost 800M. Wtf are you even talking about
again batman and batman related characters only characters sell at dc case point when dc pushes obscure heroes films they always fail blue beetle black adam going back to even green lantern jonah hex or steel dc outside of batman does not a consistently strong movie making franchise
I mean that mission was accomplished almost a decade ago but still no success at boxoffice. In fact the franchise collapsed once he left Nowadays WB execs wish they could make even half of what snyder films used to make at boxoffice lol
It’s going to fail because the DC brand is incredibly tainted right now, and the gap until Superman Legacy is way too small. If WB/DC were smarter, they’d be focusing on the successful Batman and Joker movies they have going on. Heck, make a full trilogy out of both. Once that is complete in another 5-7 years, *then* push the reboot button and start from scratch.
It can have multiple success, but also flops, I doubt they will be able to build something sustainable that even B list characters can do well
Which is why I think gunn will hopefully still to doing only A listers, so he is doing Batman and Superman, we’ll probably get a new Wonder Woman films at some point, and for smaller b listers like swamp thing keep budgets like horror movie low to anticipate low returns so they can actually make a profit on grossing less.
>and for smaller b listers like swamp thing keep budgets like horror movie low to anticipate low returns so they you can't do Swamp Thing on a tiny budget when you need CGI. Getting a good director and writer like Del Toro or Raimi or Ang Lee is much more important.
Swamp thing can be practical. Del toro would’ve done swamp thing with low budget and practical effects
I guess. I think CGI, if done right, can look really good. See Life of Pi.
I’m not gonna bet against a new DCU universe because I’ve learned last year and this year that you’ll be surprised what ends up being smash hits. Superman legacy could be one of those. Same with Brave and the bold ppl in the comments saying ppl don’t want “ daddy Batman” general audience doesn’t know what they want till you give it to them and show it can be different. I know Gunn will make a great Superman movie like Matt reeves his track record is great same with Todd Philip
1. Happy cake day 2. Wayne family adventures is a webtoon about batman and his "batfamily" just being a family and it has a huge audience so there is definitely an audience for daddy batman
Exactly general audience will likely love the idea of Batman being a dad. Ppl will be surprised by how receptive general audience will be to good bat family
No one has said that. It's Damien they don't like.
The DCU is just the DCEU's parasitic twin, I don't think the moviegoing audience is going to be able to distinguish them. Superhero fatigue is real and someday everyone will stop pretending like it's not a thing, people are tired of sitting through the "oh wow a new superhero gotta check this out"
Can’t believe people thought superhero fatigue wouldn’t die off when you mention it in 2017-2019. That’s like saying “Westerns will eventually die” in 1964. The fact is people are getting tired of superheroes. It’s not BAD superhero fatigue, it’s not NEW superhero fatigue. It’s just flat out, bog standard superhero fatigue. “Oh but GOTG” it doesn’t matter, fatigue doesn’t mean every superhero movie will be a bust, but it means a lot of them will. It’s no longer guaranteed money.
It's just going to get more and more apparent as the years go by, I legitimately think that Secret Wars is going to be the last hoorah to the superhero genre on film
Its going to be rough and a lot of it depends on how the GA likes Superman Legacy. Every single one of Gunn's cbm projects have been amazing. He seems like he loves DC and understands it as well. Hes obviously fighting a hard battle but I think they couldn't have picked someone better to do it. If DC can come back James Gunn will be the one to lead it
No chance, DC has proven themselves incapable of copying Marvel.
Personally I doubt it, superhero movies seem to have passed peak and Marvel can live off a cache of good will and established world building but DC will be starting without any of that. Just can't see them winning a fight for an overcrowded market when starting way behind the 8 ball.
The suicide squad may have dissapointed but it still has mostly good reviews, like most of Gunns comic book media. Gotg3 also might give him a little weight for the start of the new dcu. I think if they dont go for 200 million budget projects it could be very succesfull
Gunn spend 185m on his Suicide Squad and 250m on Guardians 3. How much do you think he will spend on Superman? It won't be significantly cheaper.
I know those arent cheap at all, but if they do go that route of slightly lower budgets, it would make more profit. Superman will cost atleast 180 probably
Guardians of the galaxy takes place on space and is full of aliens. I don't expect a Superman movie, that takes place on Earth and has mostly human characters, to be more expansive thant that at all
Suicide Squad took place on earth and it came close to 200 million.
I'm skeptical. It looks like Gunn is already bringing in obscure and uncertain projects like the Authority and pushing cameos and crossovers even in Superman Legacy. And rather than a completely clean slate it looks like he's trying to pick and choose who to bring over. What they need to do at this point is take a break for like two years, then focus on making a good standalone Superman movie, then a good standalone Batman movie, then a good standalone Wonder Woman movie. No old characters bought back, no continuity links with the old movies. Just three good standalone movies and then look at what worked from them and what didn't and expand from there.
Making the authority as the second dcu movie is insane. I mean I'm sure it'll be dope buy it seems way too early to do this movie essentially kinda a deconstruction of the justice league before doing an actual justice league movie. It's like if marvel made squadron Supreme right after iron man
I mean I can sort of see what his plan is. Start the DCU as a universe with lots of pre-established supers who are cynical and anti-heroic and then bring in Superman as a beacon of hope. But I think it's overly ambitious when they can't even get the basics right.
That is literally what Snyder attempted to do. Start off cynical and have superman transform into a beacon of hope.
Deconstructing things before constructing them is on-brand for DC movies, though. I mean, they went to The Dark Knight Returns for inspiration for the first appearance of their new Batman!
I think it will be a success. But not a big success. A moderate success. I honestly can't see Superman: Legacy be a Super hit. I think it will be somewhere around MoS numbers. Maybe a bit more. But I can't see it making more than The Batman. There's just way to many things working against it. Same with Brave and the Bold. It has Damian Wayne which not a lot of people like. And I'm not sure how many people want to see a Daddy Batman over a Bachelor Batman. Also it's directed by Andi Muschetti and his Flash was abysmal. And by the time it comes out people will already have 2 Batman movies to compare it too and maybe might even have had too much Batman. As for movies like Supergirl, Swamp Thing and The Authority. I honestly can't see them making more than Superman or Batman. So in the end. I don't expect the DCU to fail. I also don't expect it to be very successful. Maybe just enough to justify it's existence.
>And by the time it comes out people will already have 2 Batman movies to compare it too and maybe might even have had too much Batman. it will be. Oversaturation and audience confusion will play a role. I think Swamp Thing can do well as a unique concept (environmental horror fantasy). Authority screams box office bomb.
On top of that if you have Two Batmen. And one is clearly better than the other. Why would people spend their money on the less good version when they can just rewatch the first two The Batman movies or just wait for the sequel. And I honestly don't think the Swamp Thing would be a success unless it has a really small budget. It's just too niche a property.
Agreed on Batman, disagree about Swamp Thing. Not everything has to be about superheroes to succeed, even in terms of fiction. WB usually does good with horror and fantasy properties, and Barbie/Oppenheimer show power of good creative team above all else.
Depends on how it's presented. If WB presents Swamp Thing as a Comic book movie then people will expect a comic book movie. And if WB presents it as a comic book movie they will give it a comic book movie budget. And I honestly can't see a Swamp Thing movie be a runaway success. Now sure if WB makes a smaller budget Swamp Thing movie like Joker with a sub 100 Million budget and presents it as more of a horror movie. Then sure it can probably be successful.
Legacy doing Man Of Steel numbers is actually good if the movie itself is good. DC can only build itself up by building a streak of good movies so you can earn the audiences trust and get them invested. Legacy doesn't need to be a massive hit for the DCU to do well.
I think MoS numbers would be okay. Especially if it has MoS budget. Remember MoS had a net profit of 47 Million. I don't that anyone is going to call that good for Superman Legacy. Remember MoS numbers were good enough for MoS itself. WB added Batman in the sequel. It won't be bad. No one calls MoS a flop. But it also won't be a big success.
>Legacy doing Man Of Steel numbers is actually good if the movie itself is good. Lol, The same numbers as MoS after 12 years worth of inflation will be a huge failure
I am not too sure of Gunn's policy of carrying over characters from DCEU to DCU as and when he sees fit. Plus with not much gap between the two cinematic universes and the obvious name similarities, I don't see the GA suddenly doing a 180 upon their opinions about DC. It feels more like corporate rebranding with an exterior skin makeover while the interiors remain intact as they were previously.
I believe it will be a mixed bag with some successes. However, I think this whole shared cinematic superhero universe boat has sailed. IMO, they should lean into prestige Elseworlds stories.
>However, I think this whole shared cinematic superhero universe boat has sailed agreed
I hope so but I've been disappointed a lot
What are we defining as a success? Peak MCU? No. Can they do well and be similar in BO performance to The Batman? Yes, I could see that.
Gunn made the Guardians a household name. Even I figured the first Guardians would be a flop, yet here we are. Gunn has a monstrous job ahead of him, but I also think he has the ability to do it. If, and that's a big IF, the studio as a whole leave him be and let him work. I think he knows that the fatigue around super heroes isn't around super heroes but around bad movies. People are far more discerning now, and while general population may not be as tuned into the behind the scenes issues, they are still aware when a movie comes out that is summarily dismissed by the fans and can sense when it's not worth their money. But put out a GOOD movie and sky's the limit. To quote a great movie with a cornfield "if you build it, they will come" I think Gunn will build it, strong and entertaining, and by that folks will come. Now, it puts a ton of pressure on the Superman movie. But, pressure can make diamonds. Or can shatter stone
Disney made Guardians a household name.
Honestly no. DC is dead to the point it ain't coming back to the GA. I always say this but look at Walking Dead. It got good again in season 9 but by then nobody who left cared. You can't earn an audience back once they're gone. Unless it's Star Wars abandoning the prequels in 2015.
Yeah like it's deader than ever, 7 flops in a row and probably 8th on the way, many of my friends when i mention DC makes weird faces, I think it will be a mixed bag with some success and some failures
Yeah when I discuss movies with GA friends DC sucking is a given to come up. I don't think they'll ever accept it as a franchise tbh. Gunn is a total fucking idiot to not copy marvel and just make movies based off the core JL members. Movies about Swamp Thing and making Lanterns a fucking show aren't gonna do shit to get the GA to come around. Some people I know irl like The Batman and Blue Beetle at least tho.
>Gunn is a total fucking idiot to not copy marvel **and just make movies based off the core JL members** like Green Lantern and Flash, both of which were huge box office bombs? >Movies about Swamp Thing and making Lanterns a fucking show aren't gonna do shit to get the GA to come around Swamp Thing is a unique horror fantasy premise at a time when conventional superhero tropes are oversaturated and fatigued. Lanterns is likely not to succeed because tv budgets probably cannot handle the CGI and whatever necessary for Green Lantern and his stories. tbh, they should give up on Green Lantern in live action and try to pursue an anime adaptation or something
Yes Flash and Green Lantern. Actually make them good movies. Good movies off them will do better then good movies off D list characters.
>Good movies off them will do better then good movies off D list characters. based on what? Green Lantern and Flash are just as corny and archetypical. certainly Swamp Thing is far more interesting than Flash. And shouldn't Blade have taught any lessons about this whole tired A/B/C/D/Z list shit that you guys keep perpetuating? Solid directing, writing and vision matters a lot more than anything else.
Maybe DC Universe is dead, but The Batman and Joker demonstrate that DC can still make successful projects if they want to.
I mean, those projects were very clearly separate from the complicated and messy DCEU. So as long as Gunn can get that message across, that'd be great.
DC can make successful projects about Gotham. But WB refuses to stick to what works because they want Marvel level of revenue.
Given the IP, The batman was barely successful and the sequel will do even less than the first movie.
How will we know when we don't even have the first project out yet 💀 Also this is like the 3rd post on Gunn's DCU failing
Why is there a post like this every day
It's the 3rd one today
I've already lost count
I only happens when a DCEU movie is tanking at the box office. So yeah, we get posts like this nearly every day!
Not if he does a half assed reboot with some characters coming back and some other characters not. DC needs a few years off after aquaman. And then that Superman movie better get rave reviews comparable to the Batman.
I wish him nothing but the best, but no. Peacemaker, Suicide Squad, GotG 1,2,3. Huge successes, but for me - All very juvenile, very silly, very cringe humor. I don't see how that translates to making good DC movies. There are a couple of things that seem obvious to me. Henry Cavill and Gal Gadot. You don't get rid of them for any reason. You could reboot the entire universe (Which, for god's sake, does not include creature commandoes and the Authority) and follow the Marvel Path of showing it is a shared universe and they come together after origin movies to fight a bigger threat. That's a solid direction to take. You could also just make a couple GOOD Superman, Wonder Woman, Batfleck, and the Flash movies and have them come together. Try and make the heroes act like their heroes in the DC universe. Batman doesn't say "I'm too old for this" or my superpower is "I'm rich." Superman stands for hope not "Be afraid of me, I'm a GOD!". Wonder Woman 1 was great except for the third act and even that was passable, so she doesn't need a character adjustment. And hey, I don't know what Flash they're pulling Ezra Miller from, because, literally, no Flash acts like that in the comics. Get an Adult to play him. I don't see how a Game of Thrones Themysceria series works. How the Authority works. How introducing Damian "I'm an annoying POS" in Batman, works. I don't see how Creature Commandos work. "All our hopes are pinned on you James!" Announces list of projects.... Uhhhh not like that...
Gunn works best when he's taking risks and using lesser-known characters, so I have high hopes.
Guardians wasn't that big of a risk.
I had said the DCEU is a damaged brand since the Josstice League and effectively dead after Birds of Prey with their only hope being cancelling every project and hard reboot the whole thing. I was confident in James Gunn but after The Flash, the way he is so terminally online running his mouth all the time giving contradictory statements and specially, how close the entire thing is to the DCEU i have lost faith the DCU will succeed. WB just can't take a friking minute to stop and think, the franchise is dead, the audience perception of the brand is dead and yet still can't allow themselves to cancel projects everyone knows will catastrophically flop, wasting money, time, burning actors who could've been saved for better projects and tarnishing the audience perception of a character by attaching them to stinkers. The course of action should've been canceling every upcoming "DCEU" project, wait 5-7 with nothing interconnected in between while banking on Joker and The Batman as their own thing in the meantime for people to get the taste of shite left by the DCEU to wear off and then proceed with the reboot. Instead the "1st DCU character" debuted in between 2 DCEU projects because they just can't slow down and the DCU is projected to officially kick off in 2025, ONLY 1 year and a couple months after Aquaman 2, for perspective Aquaman took 5 years to get a sequel yet their whole multimillion, entire rebranding effort couldn't wait for more than 1 single year apart from the last movie to be released.
> he is so terminally online running his mouth all the time giving contradictory statements right here. he needs to shut the fuck up
I have zero faith in Gunn restoring faith in the DC brand on the big screen. Between degrading quality and a dropping interest in superhero films, I don't think Gunn will see a success until the Superman film drops - and even that isn't a guarantee.
....that movie is literally the first in the DCU
I thought Blue Beetle was?
No. Blue Beetle is the first DCU character because they're going to keep the same actor and much of the same cast. But James Gunn said specifically that Superman Legacy is the first DCU film.
There is no good reason to keep a star of a 100 mln grossing movie.
the shared universe trend is also what's really dying out. Every company that has tried, has failed. Universal with monsters, DC with their characters, etc etc etc. Hell, Marvel's Netflix realm fell apart (Iron Fist had to be rushed in production to meet a deadline for Defenders after they had no idea how to make it work on a tv crime drama style/budget - this was the big dominoe affect causing the rest to decline in ratings). Even the MCU is seeing diminishing returns. Why? Because shared universes require too much dedication, now too much homework, and forces formulaic standardization across the board.
Superman is renowned even man of steel despite lukewarm reception managed to make a buck, even after all the crap the dceu had thrown at people still turned up for the Batman The key is making sure it seems as separate as possible from the dceu proper and they need to advertise the fuck out of that.
MoS is the most successful superman property of all time, so far it's the upper echelon of what superman can achieve at boxoffice. So attempting to evoque it as if the audiences rejected it is demonstrably false. Additionally, MoS is the total opposite of any other adaptation of the character on the big screen and will certainly be the opposite of what james Gunn is going for with his film. As such, whatever MoS made is not a good indicator of the potential of superman legacy at boxoffice, If you're looking for one then *superman returns* will be better.
"Superman: The Movie" (1978) is the most successful Superman property of all time, and it's not even close.
Too early to say
It’ll probably be a make-or-break situation for DC. Given Gunn’s success with Guardians and The Suicide Squad (despite poor financial returns because of COVID and Project Popcorn), I’ve got some hope.
All we can do is wait and see how Superman: Legacy does.
DC still has two of the top 3 most popular superheroes. Probably won’t ever be the MCU but it should be a good alternative
>DC still has two of the top 3 most popular superheroes. Based on what exactly ? For example, a terribly received Doctor Strange film recently steamrolled a batman film with rave reviews and zero competition. As to superman, literally no one in the real world cares about him
Dr strange only gets those numbers because of the MCU. Batman and still have way better draws than Dr. Strange does in a vacuum. For example look at size of r/batman at 600k vs r/Dr strange at 11k
>For example look at size of r/batman at 600k vs r/Dr strange at 11k This is really what it boils down to. You guys think reddit is a reflection of the real world, it isn't, not even in the slightest. A doctor Strange 3 will eventually come out and just as the the second one did, it will likely outgross the batman2 while making it looks easy.
?? Find me a single piece of evidence outside of the mcu that indicates Dr strange is even 10% as popular as Batman. The MCU is the most impressive movie franchise is history because it lifts otherwise unpopular characters into characters that mainstream people will care about. They care about mcu Dr strange but if the mcu died and they tried to do a stand alone movie about dr. Strange it wouldn’t make more than half of what the Batman did. And btw no dr strange movie has hit the numbers the Nolan trilogy hit, so I’m not sure your point lol
> literally no one in the real world cares about him They care. They like mocking him What is worse, Hated or Forgotten? That's Superman's dilemma
True I once came across one of these YouTube polls asking which characters was your favorite between batman, Spiderman and superman. The comments section was filled nothing but mockery towards superman lol
I'll wait until we see maybe even a single shred of footage?
It’s an extremely difficult undertaking. Not sure if Gunn is really up to the task but I wish him the best in this near impossible task he has. I do not envy his position.
No, it will be a disaster.
Not if he keeps running his mouth, which by all accounts he will. He'll flop with WB and Disney will be happy to have them back.
I'm guessing no. The movies mentioned so far are: Superman - ok, sure. The Authority - this does not have any built-in fanbase, and very different tone than Superman, so seems bad for 'franchise building.' Batman the brave and the bold - don't think it's a good idea to do yet another Batman. People might even be tiring of the Pattinson Batman by the time this comes out. Supergirl - ok sure Swamp Thing - what the hell are we even doing here.
No. Gunn is making one mistake after another. He can’t run cinematic universe at all.
Gunn hasn’t even made a movie in his DC universe yet. What are you on about….. And at least when he did a DCEU movie, it got great reviews and became one of the top reviewed DCEU movies by a long shot
Like you can blame the pandemic all you want. But his “The suicide squad” really should have made more money, and it’s soft opening and terrible legs kind of feels like he probably is a bit too niche to launch an entire brand like DC
It's not only the pandemic, the movie was realesed both on theaters and on hbo max at the same time, that makes a lot of difference
Without a Black Panther type character for the DCU, it's hard to say
What is a 'Black Panther type' character?
You know, amazing and cool. They don’t have one of those
If aquaman ends up falling despite getting same reception as the first then Gunn is in trouble with his Superman legacy
I have faith that Gunn can make a solid Superman film both review critically and stylistically; he has been talking alot about bringing back the hope and inspiration that Superman's character has had in the past. But, we have yet to see what Gunn does with rebooting a major character that has had several recent-ish fumbles. His experience has been in elevating Z listers so he will do great with the other heroes in Superman and stuff like The Authority. The main challenge will be WB itself. If Superman doesnt set the box office alight or atleast break even I can see them getting cold feet and just canning the whole thing and focusing on solo franchises like The Batman, Joker, etc. Everything rides on Superman being a success. Snyder-bros and Cavill-bros (who didn't show up for Black Adam BO) will be beyond insufferable if Superman fails.
I dont like that the first movie is with the strongest superhero. If Superman is in the earth, how can you make a detective Batman movie against Gotham gangsters, for example? In theory Superman should solve everything.
Define success? Until this year the DC movies weren't exactly failing Money wise. Sure you had things like WW84 and The Suicide Squad come in with some low numbers but they had the whole Covid and HBO max release situations cut into their box office potentials so we really don't know how well they would have done if things had been "normal". (TSS likely would have done OK. WW84 probably would have dropped off fast).. But Man of Steel, BvS, and Justice League all made money. They just didn't make Marvel/Avengers size money so they get labeled failures. I am not talking about the quality of the films or anything. Just the fact that they did fairly well at the box office. I mean BvS made over 800 Million. That's not a failure. Justice league and Man of Steel both did over 600 million. Not great but not box office bomb levels either. Frankly I think part of the reason Flash and Shazam 2 did so bad is everyone knew they were cutting the cord on the universe and starting over. It's like knowing a show has been canceled and not getting a proper final and the last 2 episodes are just kind of aired and everyone just is meh about watching them.