seminoles1 Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 1 hour ago, KManX89 said: I hope that psycho hill was worth dying on for WB with it and Aquaflop now shaping up to be huge bombs (it dropped to #4 this week behind animated birds and a Sydney Sweeney rom-com 🤣). They were never going to keep him. It was unfounded rumors. I won't argue too much about Aquabros, but it's not a huge bomb. Definitely a flop, but falling behind 2 of the leggiest movies ever is not that embarrassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 On 1/6/2024 at 6:10 PM, seminoles1 said: They were never going to keep him. It was unfounded rumors. I won't argue too much about Aquabros, but it's not a huge bomb. Definitely a flop, but falling behind 2 of the leggiest movies ever is not that embarrassing. Id call it a bomb. It hasn't even made half its money back domestically. The movie would have to make about $500m worldwide to break even, and it may not even hit $400m. Either way...terrible decision making has destroyed and will continue to destroy WB and DC on film. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 Only posting this so I can voice my support for Milly Alcock. She was great in house of the dragon. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Supergirl must be in Superman: Legacy then. I thought they'd go younger tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KManX89 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) On 1/9/2024 at 7:39 PM, 43M said: Id call it a bomb. It hasn't even made half its money back domestically. The movie would have to make about $500m worldwide to break even, and it may not even hit $400m. Either way...terrible decision making has destroyed and will continue to destroy WB and DC on film. No, it needs over $600 mil to break even. The $206 mil budget predates 3 rounds of reshoots with an additional $100 mil spent on marketing. And it dropped all the way to 6th place on Friday. Edited January 13 by KManX89 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KManX89 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 On 1/10/2024 at 4:58 PM, Acgott said: Only posting this so I can voice my support for Milly Alcock. She was great in house of the dragon. Hoping they cast an actual blonde for Supergirl this time, so I’m pulling for Milly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 9 hours ago, KManX89 said: No, it needs over $600 mil to break even. The $206 mil budget predates 3 rounds of reshoots with an additional $100 mil spent on marketing. And it dropped all the way to 6th place on Friday. I wasnt sure of the exact number, but I figured it was AT LEAST $500m. Thats absolutely a bomb. I typically wouldnt take pleasure in this stuff, especially when its a brand I wish actually WOULD get done right....but the last several DC box office disasters bring a smile to my face....because they were warned, they didnt listen, and they FAFO. And I dont have much faith for the new DCU either. James Gunn was a good director for a bunch of unknown characters in Guardians, but I dont think he will fair nearly as well with Superman and running the rest of the DCU. The only thing I will give him credit for so far is the casting....even though I really question Hoult as Luthor....and the nepotism of casting his brother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles1 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 We're arguing semantics, because I'm not saying Aquabros isn't a disappointment or a flop. I'd consider a bomb something like The Marvels or Wish or Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny. All 3 of those are going to lose Disney A LOT more than Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom will lose WB. With ancillaries and post-box office money, Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom will actually approach its break even point. Probably won't get there after the drop it just had, but it won't lose the studio $100+ million, which is what I'd consider a true bomb. Even with how much this dropped compared to the first one, it's not even a top 5 flop/bomb/whatever of 2023. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I watched Man of Steel last night, its been awhile since I've seen it. 10 years out its easier to look back at what they got right and what went wrong. These are my thoughts: What Went Right - Mostly good casting decisions. Cavill was a good choice. He works as superman and fits the role well. Russell Crowe steals almost every scene he's in as Jor El. Michael Shannon does a good job as Zod, and most of the secondary characters were also cast well. - The soundtrack is top notch. - The opening sequence on Krypton is fun. - I think they went the right direction in the decision to make Superman not so perfect, because he's a pretty boring character without any flaws. How they executed that decision is a different story (more on that later). Minor Nitpicks - Not in love with Amy Adams as Lois Lane. - Some of the logic doesn't make a lot of sense in the movie. Like why was the codex put into Superman? Why couldn't he have just traveled with it. Or better yet if Jor El really thought Kryptonians deserved their fate and don't deserve another chance (which is basically what he tells Zod) why not just destroy the codex? Also the spaceship that landed 20,000 years ago was a scout ship, but it somehow has a chamber to breed kryptonians too? Major Mistakes - Seriously what were they thinking with Kevin Cosner's portrayal as his father? He comes off as completely ignorant and is a very unlikeable character. He basically shames his son from help people. He causes his son significant emotional damage by allowing himself to die rather than let his son save him. Like wtf? - The entire end of the movie. Basically everything after the fight in the little town in Kansas everything is downhill from there. It basically goes from the kansas slugfest, to the world engine thing, then the Zod slugfest. It becomes repetitive and also turns into a CGI crapfest that a lot of superhero movies end on. - The fact that Superman didn't really want to reveal himself but is basically forced to because of Zod is pretty lame. We never get to see Superman just helping people in this movie. The original Superman from the 70s we at least got to see people shocked by this incredibly powerful person showing up and helping people (the helicopter scene is still iconic). Other than the oil rig scene Superman doesn't help anyone in this movie. That's a big miss imo. Especially considering there was very little follow up in the next movies with this kind of thing. - I honestly can't get away from the fact that they were secretly trying to make this movie a metaphor for being outted as a gay person against their will which doesn't really work for this character at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 On 1/18/2024 at 2:51 PM, MKnight82 said: I watched Man of Steel last night, its been awhile since I've seen it. 10 years out its easier to look back at what they got right and what went wrong. These are my thoughts: What Went Right - Mostly good casting decisions. Cavill was a good choice. He works as superman and fits the role well. Russell Crowe steals almost every scene he's in as Jor El. Michael Shannon does a good job as Zod, and most of the secondary characters were also cast well. - The soundtrack is top notch. - The opening sequence on Krypton is fun. - I think they went the right direction in the decision to make Superman not so perfect, because he's a pretty boring character without any flaws. How they executed that decision is a different story (more on that later). Minor Nitpicks - Not in love with Amy Adams as Lois Lane. 100% agree with all of these. I never liked Amy Adams as Lois. Not even a little. Fine actress, but just bad casting IMO. On 1/18/2024 at 2:51 PM, MKnight82 said: - Some of the logic doesn't make a lot of sense in the movie. Like why was the codex put into Superman? Why couldn't he have just traveled with it. Or better yet if Jor El really thought Kryptonians deserved their fate and don't deserve another chance (which is basically what he tells Zod) why not just destroy the codex? Also the spaceship that landed 20,000 years ago was a scout ship, but it somehow has a chamber to breed kryptonians too? There were definitely many flaws in logic, but in regards to this specifically.... Kal El was the first NATURAL birth and one of the first children born out of actual LOVE in I think it was centuries. He represented what Jor El hoped Krypton COULD be. As far as the codex inside Kal El, he says something like "our hopes and dreams travel with you". so I think he believed the codex in Kal El represented the last hope of possibly reviving Krypton, but under the leadership of what he hoped his son would turn out to be. But one of the most interesting things explored in comics and even a TV show like Smallville is...what if he wasnt found by the Kent's? What if he had been found by someone less...ethical? Not super well thought out. At least in Smallvile, Jor El's goal was for him to specifically be found by the Kents. I this, that didnt seem like the case. On 1/18/2024 at 2:51 PM, MKnight82 said: Seriously what were they thinking with Kevin Cosner's portrayal as his father? He comes off as completely ignorant and is a very unlikeable character. He basically shames his son from help people. I dont love the way that was written, but he was more worried about his sons well being and what would happen if people found out about his powers. He felt like Clark was made for greater things. On 1/18/2024 at 2:51 PM, MKnight82 said: He causes his son significant emotional damage by allowing himself to die rather than let his son save him. Like wtf? I hated that part. Nothing about it made sense. Jonathan Kent dying is often a key piece of Clark's'/Superman's development, but it was done so poorly here. It was done perfectly in Smallville. Clark does something that basically costs his father his life and he was utterly powerless to stop it. This was about the worst way they could have done it. On 1/18/2024 at 2:51 PM, MKnight82 said: - The entire end of the movie. Basically everything after the fight in the little town in Kansas everything is downhill from there. It basically goes from the kansas slugfest, to the world engine thing, then the Zod slugfest. It becomes repetitive and also turns into a CGI crapfest that a lot of superhero movies end on. While not wrong, and there were PARTS I didnt like, I enjoyed most of the 3rd act. There were parts and pieces of dialogue I hated, but I like some of the development, especially with Zod. It basically painted him as a tragic character who was just trying to carry out his mission and save his race from near extinction. He was ruthless about how he went about it, but you can relate to his plight. I also didnt mind him killing Zod like many did. In fact, I thought it was well done. Clark clearly didnt want to do it, but realized that it was the only way. After he did it, he was heartbroken. Many say "Superman doesnnt kill", but he was put in an impossible situation there, and I think if written a bit better, it could have been solid piece of character development going forward. On 1/18/2024 at 2:51 PM, MKnight82 said: - The fact that Superman didn't really want to reveal himself but is basically forced to because of Zod is pretty lame. We never get to see Superman just helping people in this movie. The original Superman from the 70s we at least got to see people shocked by this incredibly powerful person showing up and helping people (the helicopter scene is still iconic). Other than the oil rig scene Superman doesn't help anyone in this movie. That's a big miss imo. Especially considering there was very little follow up in the next movies with this kind of thing. I get where you are coming from, but much of it was off screen. Pretty sure Lois mentions that there were instances of him helping many people,. but no one knew who he was. This was before he "officially" became Superman. I didnt really have a problem with how they did that. He helped the kids on the bus, he saved the oil rig guys, he saved Lois life and then a bunch of off screen stuff. Having him just save MORE random people wouldnt have fit in anywhere within this particular story. On 1/18/2024 at 2:51 PM, MKnight82 said: - I honestly can't get away from the fact that they were secretly trying to make this movie a metaphor for being outted as a gay person against their will which doesn't really work for this character at all. Huh? I dont understand this at all. Is this for real? If it is, thats beyond stupid. Was this confirmed by anyone, or just a fan theory? Finally, let me point out what I feel was the worst part of the movie that really damaged the Clark Kent character when it could have been a golden opportunity to make him much better... The diner scene where he almost fights the ignorant hick trucker. He walks away, which was fine....but then he impales his truck with trees. First off, youre destroying that mans livelihood and while he was a jerk....it was just so childish and played more for a laugh and a "feel good moment" than what COULD HAVE BEEN a key piece of development. Secondly, he probably cost other innocent businesses alot of money since they couldnt get what they needed with that guys truck destroyed, including whatever company he worked for. Third, it probably put innocent lives at risk for whoever had to fix that and clean it up. That whole sequence utterly reeked of Zack Snyder and his moronic ideas. He was so awful and a big reason why the DCEU failed. The BETTER way to approach that sequence IMO would have been to have that truck driver get into an accident later that night while driving drunk, and Clark ends up saving his life. It would have done the exact opposite and showed that Clark was truly good and noble and was willing to save him a slimebag like that ignorant redneck. But no, they went about that in about the worst way possible, and made Clark look like a vindictive child....even though it went against everything they were trying to portray in the character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August4th Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 she was great in House of the Dragon. She's a rising star Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 Apparently Supergirl could be filming by the end of the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KManX89 Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Apparently the new Superman suit has been leaked: Personally, I like it. It looks like a blend of 90’s Superman and current comics Superman. He’s got the hair down pat, too. 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 4 minutes ago, KManX89 said: Apparently the new Superman suit has been leaked: Personally, I like it. It looks like a blend of 90’s Superman and current comics Superman. He’s got the hair down pat, too. 👍 That's fake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 On 3/1/2024 at 4:40 PM, KManX89 said: Apparently the new Superman suit has been leaked: Personally, I like it. It looks like a blend of 90’s Superman and current comics Superman. He’s got the hair down pat, too. 👍 As noted, its fake, but I absolutely hate the red underwear. They look so awful for a modern take on a superhero. Its one thing if it were a funny parody and Joel Schumaker take on the character....but I dont think it is. James Gunn took a poll on Twitter and apparently made his decision to include the underwear on that...and I have a hard time believing alot of people who voted in favor of it were actually serious voters. Not that it would necessarily ruin the movie for me, but as stated, I dont think Gunn will be any kind of savior for the DC movie verse. Based on his projects, I think he will have several bombs and I will be shocked if within 5 years of releasing his first project, WB and DC properties isnt completely sold off and this turns out to be nothing but a fart in the wind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.