BvS BvS: Early Tweet Discussion Thread (NO SPOILERS) - Part 3

[Keyser Sushi]

I think FOX tried to save the picture when it was clear that it was falling apart.

I think they're very very aware of the public perception of them as a studio back when Rothman was in charge, and have been trying to distance themselves from that regime.

Last I heard, FOX did everything they possibly could to support Trank's vision, including populating the production with people they know and trust who can help stare it along. Once it became clear that the film was a disaster, and that (apparently) Trank's hostile attitude towards the cast and crew was a problem, they took desperate measures to save the film...

Hence what we have now. It sucks, because I like Trank, and I like this post-Rothman FOX... It's just every once in awhile, you lose some.

Yeah, I think that's spot-on. It's all on Trank... if he'd been better to work with he might have even gotten to make his movie his way, but it seems like everyone involved had a bad time, and I'm certain that poisons a production on every level. Even if the script was good, when you piss everyone off your movie is going to be garbage.

 

[Captain Shazam]

These reactions are making me cry. Zack, WB, DC, and the entire cast they deserve the recognition for putting up a movie like this and achieving success. This is a bad day for the haters.

 

[Jaxon]

Disney didn't consider it as much of one as the first one was.

The barometer for a sequel is to be more successful than its prequel. The problem is that WOM got to AoU, and stopped the kind of repeat business that "The Avengers" got. Thus, it ended up making less money with a similar budget in the same amount of time. So, I think it's fair to say that, at least for stockholders, it was a bit of a disappointment.

Some have said that Disney insiders think it severely under performed by as much as 300-400M

 

[Bane Cook]

oh my god keep em coming. THIS is what matters. not a bunch of stuffy critics.

 

[Jaxon]

Yeah, I think that's spot-on. It's all on Trank... if he'd been better to work with he might have even gotten to make his movie his way, but it seems like everyone involved had a bad time, and I'm certain that poisons a production on every level. Even if the script was good, when you piss everyone off your movie is going to be garbage.

Studios don't interfere at the level Fox did unless something was seriously wrong. They didn't interfere with Singer or Deadpool etc. Trank was the problem. He's an indie film maker in a big production machine and it wasn't a good match. Fox can take the blame for hiring him but not for trying to save the film.

 

[OtherwiseKnownAs]

@JLU51306, remove the second link in your post.

 

[scotyb91]

You guys are acting like AoU was an abomination. A month ago most of us would've killed for BvS to 'only' be as well received as AoU.

I agree. I love AoU. I regard it as one of my favorite CB films.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Some have said that Disney insiders think it severely under performed by as much as 300-400M

I like the Marvel movies but they're candy. And they're all starting to taste the same. You can't keep jamming every flavor into one thing and just keep adding flavors and expect it to be delicious. Age of Ultron had cool stuff in it, I liked it okay, but it was like a bacon blackberry vanilla lime quiche seasoned with rosemary and sugar. Ugh. I just threw up a little typing that.

It's a fun movie packed full of cool things but it doesn't quite work as a movie. It's too much world-building and not enough story, and you know that's why Joss bailed. It's exhausting and when you direct for Marvel you're on a leash the whole time.

 

[Tra-El]

We are going to be joined in the sun, guys.

 

[Citadel30]

I'll be at opening night for every marvel or DC movie. I want them ALL!!!!

 

[Gee]

[Links]

Be careful. That second tweet has swearing.

 

[DeadStroke]

I still need to see some professional critics give proper analysis, there's been numerous instances in the past where movies have gotten positive reactions on twitter only to get the opposite reaction when the critics post their articles.

This is true..

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Studios don't interfere at the level Fox did unless something was seriously wrong. They didn't interfere with Singer or Deadpool etc. Trank was the problem. He's an indie film maker in a big production machine and it wasn't a good match. Fox can take the blame for hiring him but not for trying to save the film.

Absolutely. They have to protect their investment, but the director, as the leader of the production, can instill them with confidence or s/he can... NOT instill them with confidence, and Trank was in over his head. They didn't trust him because he gave them ample reason not to.

 

[Rowsdower!]

oh my god keep em coming. THIS is what matters. not a bunch of stuffy critics.

But what if the critics like it too? That would be another win. I for one hope that they do.

 

[Ultra Nolanite]

Unbelievable.

Did they pull it off over at WB/DC? Have they started the fire?

 

[AbradolfLincler]

Is it really against the rules to post links that have swearing in them? I have to say, that's a little ridiculous...

 

[JLU51306]

@JLU51306, remove the second link in your post.

Didn't even notice. Good looking out, man.

 

[C. Lee]

Uncensored cursing is not allowed on the Hype...DO NOT link to tweets that have it.

 

[DeadStroke]

AK ‏@AKajanto 7m7 minutes ago
one of the most divisive films in recent memory is coming out this week.

This is going to be interesting. #BatmanvsSuperman

AK ‏@AKajanto 5m5 minutes ago
I'm guessing Wed is when it all goes down, the battle on social media. It won't be #BatmanvsSuperman it'll be #FansvCritics

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Unbelievable.

Did they pull it off over at WB/DC? Have they started the fire?

The fire rises!

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I see a lot of people in this thread and know there are early reactions and all I see is talk about Age of Ultron.

 

[rogbngp]

Disney didn't consider it as much of one as the first one was.

The barometer for a sequel is to be more successful than its prequel. The problem is that WOM got to AoU, and stopped the kind of repeat business that "The Avengers" got. Thus, it ended up making less money with a similar budget in the same amount of time. So, I think it's fair to say that, at least for stockholders, it was a bit of a disappointment.

No argument there. I know I didn't enjoy it as much as TA. Amazingly, despite its impressive OW and ww gross the studio even came out and said it considered it a disappointment. It led to the disbanding of the creative committee and an end to Ike Perlmutter's control. Honestly, I think it probably also played a factor in Josh Whedon leaving (although I think he was ready to anyway).

But I only made the point because if BvS does as well as AoU I should think that WB will be happy. Actually, El Maymbe said that he believes that if BvS does better than AoU they will be ecstatic. He sees that as the studio's benchmark for a roaring success for BvS. He doesn't say how he arrived at that, though.

 

[Shadow Moses]

Unbelievable.

Did they pull it off over at WB/DC? Have they started the fire?

The fire rises!

 

[Bane Cook]

But what if the critics like it too? That would be another win. I for one hope that they do.

Then that's just a cherry on top. But what matters most is how we feel. Look at how happy this movie made these people. This is the only thing that matters.

I'm still predicting like 70% RT but that doesn't matter. We've seen from MOS what stupid things critics will detract points from a movie for.

 

[OtherwiseKnownAs]

Didn't even notice. Good looking out, man.