DC Movie Universe

[Mox]

6 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

Well after that Dwayne Johnson said they aren't moving forward with Black Adam either.

Still most likely a hard reboot, but I'm gonna stop following rumors.

He mentioned elseworlds stories is something they are doing. Hopefully it's that (Levi implies he's staying, Gal rumors, etc). Though I guess technically Levi has no proof of being DCEU but still the main DCU needs the hard reboot.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Bullet Club

[INbengalfan]

7 hours ago, Bullet Club said:

It would be beyond dumb to kick Cavill to the curb only to bring back others. Especially if it is only because he wants to write a young Superman. If he doesn't commit to a hard reboot now it's already DOA.

Is there any compelling reason that either Cavill can't be made to look younger or else find someone who looks enough like him to use as a one off and Cavill jump in round 2?  How young are wqe talking?

[Mox]

27 minutes ago, INbengalfan said:

Is there any compelling reason that either Cavill can't be made to look younger or else find someone who looks enough like him to use as a one off and Cavill jump in round 2?  How young are wqe talking?

Not that I'm aware of

[MacReady]

I told all of you what's happening.

They're not burning bridges, and they're waiting until they have the opportunity to talk to these people face to face.

Gunn met with Cavill, Cavill isn't Superman.
Gunn met with Johnson, Black Adam isn't part of the plan.

You don't lose a billion dollars on a convoluted, disjointed mess and continue with any part of that convoluted, disjointed mess.

We're going to round up here. International markets combined is probably 1/3rd. Studios get 1/3 of the actual box office rake. So let's round up and say half. Domestic isn't even 100% profits either.

So budget = production budget+half of that for advertising.
Return = Domestic + half international.

Black Adam - 390 million budget.
Return - 278 million.
Loss - 112 million.

The Batman - 277.5 million
Return - 569 million
Some of you might say this is why The Batman 2 will continue, but...

The Dark Knight - 270 million budget, but it made 534 million DOMESTICALLY. 769 million following the same formula.

The Batman was a profit, but not near the levels it should have been.

So saying Batman is a cash cow is like having a literal cow made out of pennies, and then having the option for another cow made out of 100 dollar bills at the same weight and mass. The Dark Knight Rises had a profit of 389 million.

The Batman profit - 291.5 million
The Dark Knight Rises - 389 million
The Dark Knight - 499 million

Black Adam - 112 million loss
Suicide Squad - 166 million loss
Wonder Woman 1984 - 193 million loss
Birds of Prey - 6 million loss
Joker - massive gains

You can't make this many movies with such unreliable returns. It's not sustainable.

When looking at the MCU, they haven't had a single movie lose money. That's how you can sustain a franchise. The MCU ruined superhero movies forever as far as one offs/sequels. There has to be something holding them all together to get an appeal to each new one.

 

[INbengalfan]

2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I told all of you what's happening.

They're not burning bridges, and they're waiting until they have the opportunity to talk to these people face to face.

Gunn met with Cavill, Cavill isn't Superman.
Gunn met with Johnson, Black Adam isn't part of the plan.

You don't lose a billion dollars on a convoluted, disjointed mess and continue with any part of that convoluted, disjointed mess.

We're going to round up here. International markets combined is probably 1/3rd. Studios get 1/3 of the actual box office rake. So let's round up and say half. Domestic isn't even 100% profits either.

So budget = production budget+half of that for advertising.
Return = Domestic + half international.

Black Adam - 390 million budget.
Return - 278 million.
Loss - 112 million.

The Batman - 277.5 million
Return - 569 million
Some of you might say this is why The Batman 2 will continue, but...

The Dark Knight - 270 million budget, but it made 534 million DOMESTICALLY. 769 million following the same formula.

The Batman was a profit, but not near the levels it should have been.

So saying Batman is a cash cow is like having a literal cow made out of pennies, and then having the option for another cow made out of 100 dollar bills at the same weight and mass. The Dark Knight Rises had a profit of 389 million.

The Batman profit - 291.5 million
The Dark Knight Rises - 389 million
The Dark Knight - 499 million

Black Adam - 112 million loss
Suicide Squad - 166 million loss
Wonder Woman 1984 - 193 million loss
Birds of Prey - 6 million loss
Joker - massive gains

You can't make this many movies with such unreliable returns. It's not sustainable.

When looking at the MCU, they haven't had a single movie lose money. That's how you can sustain a franchise. The MCU ruined superhero movies forever as far as one offs/sequels. There has to be something holding them all together to get an appeal to each new one.

 

Nobody is arguing the numbers.  Yes, they are rebooting.  But who they use for actors/actresses with different writers and directors  remains to be seen and is the conversation.  

[MacReady]

1 hour ago, INbengalfan said:

Nobody is arguing the numbers.  Yes, they are rebooting.  But who they use for actors/actresses with different writers and directors  remains to be seen and is the conversation.  

That’s what I’m discussing, too.

My bet is not a single current actor in the DCEU is going to remain the same character as anyone in this reboot.

Including The Batman.

And I’d bet the Penguin series on HBO gets canned soon, and that The Batman sequel gets called off.

[INbengalfan]

8 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

That’s what I’m discussing, too.

My bet is not a single current actor in the DCEU is going to remain the same character as anyone in this reboot.

Including The Batman.

And I’d bet the Penguin series on HBO gets canned soon, and that The Batman sequel gets called off.

You're probably right.  I enjoyed The Batman so i'd like that to continue as its own thing, along with the Penguin and arkham stuff.  I could also see them just recasting Pattinson and rolling forward if he isn't who Gunn wants.

[MacReady]

5 minutes ago, INbengalfan said:

You're probably right.  I enjoyed The Batman so i'd like that to continue as its own thing, along with the Penguin and arkham stuff.  I could also see them just recasting Pattinson and rolling forward if he isn't who Gunn wants.

I think Gunn is more excited about the story than the actors, and that he wants his universe to build much like the MCU did.

[Mox]

If you want to compare The Batman to TDK and TDKR that's fine but you're leaving out its closest comparison Batman Begins, which it vastly outpaces. Still see no reason to think Reevesverse is in any danger. He and Gunn have already talked, and Elseworlds are confirmed a thing.

[StLunatic88]

6 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

The Batman - 277.5 million
Return - 569 million
Some of you might say this is why The Batman 2 will continue, but...

The Dark Knight - 270 million budget, but it made 534 million DOMESTICALLY. 769 million following the same formula.

The Batman was a profit, but not near the levels it should have been.

So saying Batman is a cash cow is like having a literal cow made out of pennies, and then having the option for another cow made out of 100 dollar bills at the same weight and mass. The Dark Knight Rises had a profit of 389 million.

The Batman profit - 291.5 million
The Dark Knight Rises - 389 million
The Dark Knight - 499 million

......those are sequels to a proven Batman Film, but keep trying to twist this to fit your narrative

The profit numbers you are citing for The Batman were more than Batman Begins entire domestic Box Office, and less than $100m under its entire World Wide box office. If you want to project some numbers, you should be looking at the Profits from Batman Begins to what Dark Knight made. So thats something like 5x? Even if we are saying TDK is the ultimate Outlier, even a disappointing Rises was over 3x. SO then you are saying they are about to walk away from a potential half a Billion profit for a sequel? Just to appease James Gunn?

Maybe we should compare it to another superhero Sequel, which also had Superman in the title? And Wonder Woman in the Marketing? It may have Tripled the profits of BvS when all is said and done

The Batman was also never part of the DCEU, not in style or tone or even a single reference/easter egg. I know you dont like "what they have done" with the Joker, but they arent canceling (and say it with me this time) a Cash Cow because of a 30 second clip that some fans didnt like. Which is a character that might not even be part of the sequel.

The Batman was one of the Most Successful first entries into a Superhero franchise EVER.  

[MacReady]

1 hour ago, StLunatic88 said:

......those are sequels to a proven Batman Film, but keep trying to twist this to fit your narrative

The profit numbers you are citing for The Batman were more than Batman Begins entire domestic Box Office, and less than $100m under its entire World Wide box office. If you want to project some numbers, you should be looking at the Profits from Batman Begins to what Dark Knight made. So thats something like 5x? Even if we are saying TDK is the ultimate Outlier, even a disappointing Rises was over 3x. SO then you are saying they are about to walk away from a potential half a Billion profit for a sequel? Just to appease James Gunn?

Maybe we should compare it to another superhero Sequel, which also had Superman in the title? And Wonder Woman in the Marketing? It may have Tripled the profits of BvS when all is said and done

The Batman was also never part of the DCEU, not in style or tone or even a single reference/easter egg. I know you dont like "what they have done" with the Joker, but they arent canceling (and say it with me this time) a Cash Cow because of a 30 second clip that some fans didnt like. Which is a character that might not even be part of the sequel.

The Batman was one of the Most Successful first entries into a Superhero franchise EVER.  

This is all true. Mostly true.

First, I liked The Batman a lot. I bought it after I watched it. I don’t hate the Joker in it, just didn’t like it. Didn’t feel like what I thought the Joker should be.

But…

Barman V Superman cost 275 million and it made 601 million by the same calculations.

Why? Because it was connected to an underwhelming Superman movie.

So… A BAD Batman movie made more than the better one because it was connected to something bigger. And that’s… My point.

They have to start Batman over or they have to connect this to The Batman. That, or delay the start of this until after The Batman 2 releases.

[MacReady]

6 hours ago, Bullet Club said:

If you want to compare The Batman to TDK and TDKR that's fine but you're leaving out its closest comparison Batman Begins, which it vastly outpaces. Still see no reason to think Reevesverse is in any danger. He and Gunn have already talked, and Elseworlds are confirmed a thing.

It’s a fair point, but the response is Batman Begins rejuvenated a dead franchise that had been ruined by Schumacher.

It’s still an 8.2 close to 20 years later when The Batman is sitting at 7.8.

Batman V Superman owes a lot to Begins, too. And so does The Batman.

Same formula, the last Batman movie cost 175 million to make, it made 100 million domestically.

 

[Mox]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

It’s a fair point, but the response is Batman Begins rejuvenated a dead franchise that had been ruined by Schumacher.

It’s still an 8.2 close to 20 years later when The Batman is sitting at 7.8.

Batman V Superman owes a lot to Begins, too. And so does The Batman.

Same formula, the last Batman movie cost 175 million to make, it made 100 million domestically.

 

This is all true, and fair. I love Batman Begins. It's definitely more rewatchable than The Batman. Though I would add The Batman did what it did despite DC being an absolute disaster the last few years, alongside a connected universe with its own Batman, and drastically more superhero options. Begins came 8 years after B&R with a completely different tone. TB was released after multiple consecutive DCEU bombs and immediately followed by a bomb. The fact that it was this profitable, despite all that, and being the first in a series, is pretty remarkable.

[MacReady]

1 hour ago, Bullet Club said:

This is all true, and fair. I love Batman Begins. It's definitely more rewatchable than The Batman. Though I would add The Batman did what it did despite DC being an absolute disaster the last few years, alongside a connected universe with its own Batman, and drastically more superhero options. Begins came 8 years after B&R with a completely different tone. TB was released after multiple consecutive DCEU bombs and immediately followed by a bomb. The fact that it was this profitable, despite all that, and being the first in a series, is pretty remarkable.

And I've never denied any of that.

What I've denied is whether or not it's best to continue making those when they won't connect or to just scrap it for the new Batman.

Because there will be a new Batman.

[Mox]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

And I've never denied any of that.

What I've denied is whether or not it's best to continue making those when they won't connect or to just scrap it for the new Batman.

Because there will be a new Batman.

Yeah, I understand that. Your take makes sense.