All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation - Part 4

[Boy Scout]

Vaughn better do Superman.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Vaughn better do Superman.

It’s the only DC movie he should do. Come on, WB and Vaughn.

 

[Flint Marko]

I'd love him on any Marvel or DC property, but Superman in particular. He's honestly one of the best directors working today.

It really isn't. BvS doomed this version of JL, which I acknowledged in previous posts, but it would not have doomed a well-reviewed JL that had month of positive buzz leading into its opening weekend. Your opening weekend evidence is based off of a version of the film that did not get good reviews. Even the multiplier is based off of this version of the film that earned a lackluster response from audiences. Imagine the multiplier had the film been certified fresh.

Quit dancing around my point. JL's disastrously low opening wasn't due to bad reviews or bad WOM. BvS had worse reviews and worse WOM and more time for that to spread, but still opened to double what JL did.

JL opened up so catastrophically low because of how damaged this franchise is.

Had the movie been embraced by critics and audiences, it would have certainly made more. But it would need to have made way, way more, to the tune of a few hundred million dollars, to not be categorized as a flop. But that was never going to happen. Why?

Because it opened so low. Because interest in this franchise had diminished signicantly, and it wasn't due to reviews or WOM. It was due to BvS. Because everything you've been insisting about how JL "wouldn't have been a flop had it been received better" is nonsense. The numbers are on my side, not yours. The opening shows that interest in this franchise had diminished significantly, and BvS was the biggest contributing factor in that.

 

[brandeezy89]

Personally I'd consider $650-$700 a success for Aquaman.

550M+ basing off the 160M budget. Add 100M in P&A give or take, that's 260M, double that and that's 520M+ to be an success.

 

[Boy Scout]

Quit dancing around my point. JL's disastrously low opening wasn't due to bad reviews or bad WOM. BvS had worse reviews and worse WOM and more time for that to spread, but still opened to double what JL did.

JL opened up so catastrophically low because of how damaged this franchise is.

Had the movie been embraced by critics and audiences, it would have certainly made more. But it would need to have made way, way more, to the tune of a few hundred million dollars, to not be categorized as a flop. But that was never going to happen. Why?

Because it opened so low. Because interest in this franchise had diminished signicantly, and it wasn't due to reviews or WOM. It was due to BvS. Because everything you've been insisting about how JL "wouldn't have been a flop had it been received better" is nonsense. The numbers are on my side, not yours. The opening shows that interest in this franchise had diminished significantly, and BvS was the biggest contributing factor in that.

I don’t even know why you still try.

 

[ludovica]

I guess it depends what the measurement for success is quantified as.

Is it in just critical or fan acceptance or general audience support?

I'd say for tentpoles the primary measure has to be box office, studios structure their whole budgets around them.
Of course a succesful box office for a panned film is anyway not a good omen for the future of any franchise.

 

[Superchan]

Quit dancing around my point. JL's disastrously low opening wasn't due to bad reviews or bad WOM.

JL opened up so catastrophically low because of how damaged this franchise is.

Had the movie been embraced by critics and audiences, it would have certainly made more. But it would need to have made way, way more, to the tune of a few hundred million dollars, to not be categorized as a flop. But that was never going to happen. Why?

Agreed, as I said before even if JL received a TDK level reception and multiplier (X3.5) it would have ended up with a lesser domestic take than BvS, which was a major disappointment it's own right. All this due to the film's shocking opening weekend no. and all thanks to dawn of just-s**t.
Had JL been a great movie it might've saved some face and not be considered the biggest superhero flop since fan4stic but alas it wasn't.
For me though the silver lining is that we'll (likely) never have to see Zack Snyder touch superman or any other DC character ever again!

 

[Iceman]

Vaughn better do Superman.

Someone make it happen!

 

[misslane38]

Quit dancing around my point. JL's disastrously low opening wasn't due to bad reviews or bad WOM. BvS had worse reviews and worse WOM and more time for that to spread, but still opened to double what JL did.

You are debating a point I never made. I have said repeatedly that this poor version of JL failed in part because of the legacy of BvS. Because JL wasn't a good film, the negative effects of BvS were exacerbated. BvS opened better because it was BvS. It didn't have BvS preceding it. This version of JL (a poor quality version with bad reviews, bad social media buzz, bad PR, hot competition) opened worse than BvS because it had a lot of negative factors going against it.

JL opened up so catastrophically low because of how damaged this franchise is.

Never disputed that and have repeatedly agreed with that, since I believe the negative effects of BvS exacerbated the existing problems with JL. I continue to believe that JL is ultimately what doomed JL.

Had the movie been embraced by critics and audiences, it would have certainly made more. But it would need to have made way, way more, to the tune of a few hundred million dollars, to not be categorized as a flop. But that was never going to happen. Why?

Plenty of box office experts were predicting JL could make as much as 900 million had it received positive reviews and good word of mouth. And, frankly, I have only ever argued that a good version of JL would have performed substantially better than the version we have.

Because it opened so low. Because interest in this franchise had diminished signicantly, and it wasn't due to reviews or WOM. It was due to BvS. Because everything you've been insisting about how JL "wouldn't have been a flop had it been received better" is nonsense. The numbers are on my side, not yours. The opening shows that interest in this franchise had diminished significantly, and BvS was the biggest contributing factor in that.

You don't have numbers on your side. You have post hoc fallacies. Your logic is full of holes. The opening weekend numbers are proof of nothing.

 

[UltimatePyro9]

Honesty, the DCEU (or Zack Snyder's version of it anyways) was doomed because of BVS. There were so many dumb moments to choose from: the Jolly Rancher scene, the Knightmare scene, "Granny's Peach Tea" scene, the metahuman file aka "WB's press kit" scene, and as always (everybody say it with me): "MARTHA" "WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME!"

That said, Wonder Woman was decent (since Snyder had little to do with it).

 

[Superchan]

Honesty, the DCEU (or Zack Snyder's version of it anyways) was doomed because of BVS. There were so many dumb moments to choose from: the Jolly Rancher scene, the Knightmare scene, "Granny's Peach Tea" scene, the metahuman file aka "WB's press kit" scene, and as always (everybody say it with me): "MARTHA" "WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME!"

That said, Wonder Woman was decent (since Snyder had little to do with it).

Yeah all those were god awful but what killed the movie IMO was mopey, emo, dialogue allergic superman and psycho/villain batman.
It took 3 s***y transfomers movies to damage the franchise (boxoffice wise) yet BvS alone managed to do the same to the DCEU, truly an accomplishment!!! well done Zack!

 

[Flint Marko]

Plenty of box office experts were predicting JL could make as much as 900 million had it received positive reviews and good word of mouth.

Way before it's disastrous opening.

I'll say it again because you are picking and choosing what you want to acknowledge: BvS had worse reviews and worse WOM going into it's opening weekend but opened huge.

JL didn't open huge, because it's fate was sealed after BvS.

And, frankly, I have only ever argued that a good version of JL would have performed substantially better than the version we have.

You argued that a good version would not have flopped. That is the crux of this debate. Those are your words. That is patently incorrect.

That low opening tells us that this movie was destined to flop. It didn't have a chance of hitting 900 million even if it had been a masterpiece on par with TDK. Good reviews don't make a difference of hundreds upon hundreds of millions at the box office, particularly with this much competition.

The numbers are 100% on my side, but Boy Scout is right. I'm just wasting my time with someone who has dug their heels in regardless of facts.

 

[The Shape]

I don’t even know why you still try.

Because he can't help himself and clearly gets off on talking about this every day.

 

[Steyin]

I'd say Flint is right. A good number of people I know didn't go to see JL because they didn't like BvS. It's really that simple.

 

[Boy Scout]

Because he can't help himself and clearly gets off on talking about this every day.

Actually, I just think engaging with misslane is often pointless.

 

[FunkMiller]

I'd say Flint is right. A good number of people I know didn't go to see JL because they didn't like BvS. It's really that simple.

And were this any other movie, and were people not such evangelical Snyder fans, they’d probably agree. The only reason people are positing the notion that JL flopped because it was a bad movie, instead of because BvS was a bad movie, is because they don’t want to admit that BvS was a bad movie.

All the evidence supports this though. The OW for both films. Their multipliers. Their CinemaScores. Their critical reaction. Their BO legs. Under any other circumstances where BvS wasn’t a Zack Snyder film, this argument simply wouldn’t exist.

 

[Flint Marko]

Because he can't help himself and clearly gets off on talking about this every day.

Stay salty

And were this any other movie, and were people not such evangelical Snyder fans, they’d probably agree. The only reason people are positing the notion that JL flopped because it was a bad movie, instead of because BvS was a bad movie, is because they don’t want to admit that BvS was a bad movie.

All the evidence supports this though. The OW for both films. Their multipliers. Their CinemaScores. Their critical reaction. Their BO legs. Under any other circumstances where BvS wasn’t a Zack Snyder film, this argument simply wouldn’t exist.

Well said.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

And were this any other movie, and were people not such evangelical Snyder fans, they’d probably agree. The only reason people are positing the notion that JL flopped because it was a bad movie, instead of because BvS was a bad movie, is because they don’t want to admit that BvS was a bad movie.

All the evidence supports this though. The OW for both films. Their multipliers. Their CinemaScores. Their critical reaction. Their BO legs. Under any other circumstances where BvS wasn’t a Zack Snyder film, this argument simply wouldn’t exist.

The keyword there being "all." It isn't like we are just clinging to the Tomatoscore alone or some other score. EVERYTHING points to the fact that BvS was widely disliked by not just critics, but the general audience as well and that it affected JL's performance and opening weekend in particular. The evidence is overwhelming.

 

[misslane38]

Way before it's disastrous opening.

I'll say it again because you are picking and choosing what you want to acknowledge: BvS had worse reviews and worse WOM going into it's opening weekend but opened huge.

JL didn't open huge, because it's fate was sealed after BvS.

JL didn't open huge because it had poor reviews, bad PR, bad social media buzz, AND the BvS effect. To argue that the opening of JL would have been disastrous and a done deal regardless of the quality of the actual film is spurious and fallacious reasoning. BvS sealed the fate of JL when JL failed to differentiate itself enough from its predecessor. If JL had wowed critics, earlier preview audiences, and bloggers for a month leading up to its debut, I find it very difficult to believe it wouldn't have affected the opening weekend box office receipts. And I am at a loss as to why you are under the mistaken impression that your "evidence" is not only convincing, but that it is even "evidence" at all.

You argued that a good version would not have flopped. That is the crux of this debate. Those are your words. That is patently incorrect.

Yes, and to me not flopping means earning back production and marketing budget with perhaps some profit leftover. I don't think that would have been difficult if the film had been well-received by critics and audiences.

That low opening tells us that this movie was destined to flop. It didn't have a chance of hitting 900 million even if it had been a masterpiece on par with TDK. Good reviews don't make a difference of hundreds upon hundreds of millions at the box office, particularly with this much competition.

That low opening tells you about the opening of this version of JL. It doesn't tell you anything else. It's fallacious to argue otherwise.

The numbers are 100% on my side, but Boy Scout is right. I'm just wasting my time with someone who has dug their heels in regardless of facts.

Your numbers are evidence of a post hoc fallacies and spurious reasoning. It's horrendously poor logic.

I'd say Flint is right. A good number of people I know didn't go to see JL because they didn't like BvS. It's really that simple.

Never disputed that. I am asking whether or not those people would have checked JL out had it received good reviews and positive buzz opening weekend and beyond.

And were this any other movie, and were people not such evangelical Snyder fans, they’d probably agree. The only reason people are positing the notion that JL flopped because it was a bad movie, instead of because BvS was a bad movie, is because they don’t want to admit that BvS was a bad movie.

Nope. I have repeatedly acknowledged BvS was not critically acclaimed or beloved by audiences. I am making an argument about whether or not that poor reception made it impossible for any version of JL to succeed. If that is truly the calculus, then ANY version of JL, including one not directed by Snyder, one without reshoots, one without any controversy at all would still have flopped.

All the evidence supports this though. The OW for both films. Their multipliers. Their CinemaScores. Their critical reaction. Their BO legs. Under any other circumstances where BvS wasn’t a Zack Snyder film, this argument simply wouldn’t exist.

Um, yeah, not making an argument about the reception of BvS. It is a fact that BvS performed poorly. Just making an argument about JL. That, ultimately, what prevented JL from being any kind of success was JL. Not that BvS would not have played a role in the outcome of JL, but that the critical and audience response to JL is what determined the degree to which BvS affected JL.

The keyword there being "all." It isn't like we are just clinging to the Tomatoscore alone or some other score. EVERYTHING points to the fact that BvS was widely disliked by not just critics, but the general audience as well and that it affected JL's performance and opening weekend in particular. The evidence is overwhelming.

Again, I am not making the above argument at all. These are straw men.

Look guys, if you can't even characterize my thesis properly and must rely on ad hoc fallacies, then I can't engage in a discussion with you in good faith. At this point, we are going to have to agree to disagree.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The only way I could realistic see JL not being a flop is if they went much cheaper on the budget. At $300 million it would always be difficult.

To turn things around in one film there needed to be a hook, and BvS already blew that by having the Trinity together. Nothing they could have done on JL would have changed that.

 

[UltimatePyro9]

Especially with the lame character Steppenwolf as the main villain.

 

[misslane38]

To turn things around in one film there needed to be a hook, and BvS already blew that by having the Trinity together. Nothing they could have done on JL would have changed that.

Especially with the lame character Steppenwolf as the main villain.

Darkseid.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Especially with the lame character Steppenwolf as the main villain.

Darkseid.

Joe Moviegoer has no clue who Darkseid is.

Thinking he would make a difference is the same mistake fans made when they thought adding Flash and Aquaman would make a difference.

 

[UltimatePyro9]

Joe Moviegoer has no clue who Darkseid is.

Thinking he would make a difference is the same mistake fans made when they thought adding Flash and Aquaman would make a difference.

Darkseid wasn’t even in the movie so all we have is Steppenwolf, whose lamer than even Malekith.

 

[misslane38]

Joe Moviegoer has no clue who Darkseid is.

Thinking he would make a difference is the same mistake fans made when they thought adding Flash and Aquaman would make a difference.

I disagree that it wouldn't have made a difference.

Darkseid wasn’t even in the movie so all we have is Steppenwolf, whose lamer than even Malekith.

Not the point. The point is that featuring a better villain (e.g. Darkseid) would not have been lame and could have been more of a hook to get people to check out the film. Darkseid would have been more of an enticement than Steppenwolf, surely.