BvS new Zack Snyder quote implies WB forced Batman/Superman movie instead of MOS2???

[Tobias]

This quote has been vexing to many. It sort of hangs there and is open to endless interpretation. Good or bad.

This is why Snyder needs to be asked or come forward on his own and clarify things.

Specifically address the future of the MOS franchise. Right now its not clear if there is a future - other than Cavill appearing in this Batman launch/WF film and then in the first JL film.

 

[Marvin]

Putting Batman in a Superman doesn't say ANYTHING inherent about WB's "confidence" in either character, or a solo franchise, or any of that. It shows their desire to create a cohesive DC Universe on film in some fashion.

The sad reality is if WB had just announced a Superman stand alone sequel, there would no doubt be the large community that would criticize them for that act. Especially with marvels continual practice of the opposite(with every film).

Then when the studio faces a summer quarter in which they are not only soundly financially defeated by their direct competitor but the MOS sequel has it's profits possibly and literally doubled by one or even both of the big disney 2015 tentpoles...then and only then will people suggest that maybe possibly WB might have wanted to get into the novelty business and out of the traditional one.

 

[Tobias]

Then when the studio faces a summer quarter in which they are not only soundly financially defeated by their direct competitor but the MOS sequel has it's profits possibly and literally doubled by one or even both of the big disney 2015 tentpoles...then and only then will people suggest that maybe possibly WB might have wanted to get into the novelty business and out of the traditional one.

I think you nail it.

Reading between the lines and sifting through all the stuff out there it seems that WB is not sure how well an MOS sequel will do on its own. Given the reviews and its poor legs and in light of a Forbes article in June suggesting MOS2 could fall victim to the Tomb Raider syndrome. Basically the sequel underperforming the original film.

Add to that WB's insistence on doing a CBM film in 2015 against the uber competition of AV2 and SW and voila - Batman to the rescue. In fact I just read an article referring to the film as the "Batman assisted" MOS sequel.

"Production on the Batman-assisted sequel to Man Of Steel is expected to begin next year and Warner Bros are targeting a summer 2015 release date"

http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/bryan-cranston-on-playing-lex-luthor-in-man-of-steel/316548

Like it or not, the impression is setting in that MOS was a disappointment to WB - thanks in part to Robinov expecting a 1 billion plus showing.

I am not happy they are not doing a stand alone sequel to MOS, but if the film has to come out in 2015 then better that than as you say a stand-alone MOS2 that makes less than half of the 2015 Disney tent-poles -the franchise is in an iffy position and that would certainly kill it.

 

[Marvin]

umm no.

Actually, my point was that even if a sequel to MOS does gang busters by typical standards. Let's be generous and say maybe 900million to 1.1 billion.
(see TDKR-SkyFall-Hobbit...all big winners) Even if this film does that well, you are looking at facing off against Avengers two. Standard fan math has successful sequels out grossing their successful precursors by a decent amount(even TF2 makes this point), and last I checked Avengers made 1 and a half billion.

That means Avengers 2 could be looking at entering the James Cameron 2 billion club or close enough to it(though that ain't easy in the summer especially in a spot like MOS had this year).
Ok so Avengers 2 making almost 2 billion and MOS2 without batman making a bloody successful 1.1 billion. That leaves us with a situation where a disney property and direct competition to a WB property has all but doubled the profits on the table alone. And then that same summer you have a star wars film fueled by mass hype and mystery...I honestly see that singular film making more than Harry Potters best if it's good. So that's a possible 1.4 for Starwars.

See what I'm getting at here? It has nothing to do with this Tomb Raider syndrome, it has everything to do with WB not rolling over and handing their competition to their direct competitors within a season. It's not a good look for investors.

Scott Mendelson can write all the articles he wants against the movie, sooner or later we're going to have to step back and ask why this guy has taken it upon himself to keep doing so(officially and on twitter).
-on forbes.

The only impression I take personally by all this is that MOS did leagues better than almost all other series starts and reboots in it's category and that even if it's straight sequel doubled it's current profits that wouldn't be enough to be seen as a win in a summer with those kinda numbers from the competition, businesses want to win. What would in fact happen however, is what has been happening this very year. The film would do amazing numbers but relative to the evolving landscape people would be, or act blind to that fact and claim it a failure anyways. Instead of my saying what's wrong with 650million(current) for a start, I'd be saying what's wrong with 1billion for a sequel...

Even if the WB executives were super happy with MOS(this isn't Superman Returns), why on earth would they let this situation play out like this?

If WB announced a JLA movie for 2017, this same logic would suggest it's because they are disappointed in their solo films...
it's the impression it would it give.

 

[king666]

The only impression I take personally by all this is that MOS did leagues better than almost all other series starts and reboots in it's category and that even if it's straight sequel doubled it's current profits that wouldn't be enough to be seen as a win in a summer with those kinda numbers from the competition, businesses want to win. What would in fact happen however, is what has been happening this very year. The film would do amazing numbers but relative to the evolving landscape people would be, or act blind to that fact and claim it a failure anyways.

lol this reminds me of tobias

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I think you nail it.

Reading between the lines and sifting through all the stuff out there it seems that WB is not sure how well an MOS sequel will do on its own. Given the reviews and its poor legs and in light of a Forbes article in June suggesting MOS2 could fall victim to the Tomb Raider syndrome. Basically the sequel underperforming the original film.

Add to that WB's insistence on doing a CBM film in 2015 against the uber competition of AV2 and SW and voila - Batman to the rescue. In fact I just read an article referring to the film as the "Batman assisted" MOS sequel.

"Production on the Batman-assisted sequel to Man Of Steel is expected to begin next year and Warner Bros are targeting a summer 2015 release date"

http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/bryan-cranston-on-playing-lex-luthor-in-man-of-steel/316548

Like it or not, the impression is setting in that MOS was a disappointment to WB - thanks in part to Robinov expecting a 1 billion plus showing.

I am not happy they are not doing a stand alone sequel to MOS, but if the film has to come out in 2015 then better that than as you say a stand-alone MOS2 that makes less than half of the 2015 Disney tent-poles -the franchise is in an iffy position and that would certainly kill it.

BUMP. They can always have a true sequel later, though I'd want the story to be completely earth-based.

WB needs its own meme.

Scumbag WB: Gives comic fans dream movie. Compromises its early franchsie.

Or something like that

 

[Tobias]

BUMP. They can always have a true sequel later, though I'd want the story to be completely earth-based.

WB needs its own meme.

Scumbag WB: Gives comic fans dream movie. Compromises its early franchsie.

Or something like that

Supposedly WB doesn't give a fig about the fans but only what the GA wants. When I wrote my letters to WB and mentioned them here the consensus seemed to be that WB could care less what I, the fanboy, wants.

Fans may be clamoring for WF, but I don't think its as big a deal for the GA. If WB is making WF its because they think the GA wants it but I am not sure the GA is really clamoring for a WF.

 

[Marvin]

Supposedly WB doesn't give a fig about the fans but only what the GA wants. When I wrote my letters to WB and mentioned them here the consensus seemed to be that WB could care less what I, the fanboy, wants.

You're most insightful post yet imo.
Sorry Tobias but write all the letters you want don't speak for me(and what I want), another such fanboy.

It's like you assume they would open your letter and be, "shut down the studio, the fanboys have spoken, we need to listen to this Tobias, he speaks for the fans..." And when they didn't you proclaimed that the studio doesn't care about fan(boy)s.
If that's the assertion you are making than I suppose I can see why you have been posting the things you have.

Here's a thought, what if the studio received another letter form another fanboy. Say that letter said good job guys, keep doing what you are doing.....lot's of people write to studios dude.

 

[jmc]

umm no.

Actually, my point was that even if a sequel to MOS does gang busters by typical standards. Let's be generous and say maybe 900million to 1.1 billion.
(see TDKR-SkyFall-Hobbit...all big winners) Even if this film does that well, you are looking at facing off against Avengers two. Standard fan math has successful sequels out grossing their successful precursors by a decent amount(even TF2 makes this point), and last I checked Avengers made 1 and a half billion.

That means Avengers 2 could be looking at entering the James Cameron 2 billion club or close enough to it(though that ain't easy in the summer especially in a spot like MOS had this year).
Ok so Avengers 2 making almost 2 billion and MOS2 without batman making a bloody successful 1.1 billion. That leaves us with a situation where a disney property and direct competition to a WB property has all but doubled the profits on the table alone. And then that same summer you have a star wars film fueled by mass hype and mystery...I honestly see that singular film making more than Harry Potters best if it's good. So that's a possible 1.4 for Starwars.

See what I'm getting at here? It has nothing to do with this Tomb Raider syndrome, it has everything to do with WB not rolling over and handing their competition to their direct competitors within a season. It's not a good look for investors.

Scott Mendelson can write all the articles he wants against the movie, sooner or later we're going to have to step back and ask why this guy has taken it upon himself to keep doing so(officially and on twitter).
-on forbes.

The only impression I take personally by all this is that MOS did leagues better than almost all other series starts and reboots in it's category and that even if it's straight sequel doubled it's current profits that wouldn't be enough to be seen as a win in a summer with those kinda numbers from the competition, businesses want to win. What would in fact happen however, is what has been happening this very year. The film would do amazing numbers but relative to the evolving landscape people would be, or act blind to that fact and claim it a failure anyways. Instead of my saying what's wrong with 650million(current) for a start, I'd be saying what's wrong with 1billion for a sequel...

Even if the WB executives were super happy with MOS(this isn't Superman Returns), why on earth would they let this situation play out like this?

If WB announced a JLA movie for 2017, this same logic would suggest it's because they are disappointed in their solo films...
it's the impression it would it give.

Frankly if all this has become is pissing contest, then **** everyone involved in every one of these studios. They are plague on movies and will contribute to the death of the blockbuster as we know it.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I think this was fairly obvious since the beginning. They wouldn't be having Batman in one scene or two.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I think this was fairly obvious since the beginning. They wouldn't be having Batman in one scene or two.

But that would be the RIGHT thing to do. Give Batman 3 or 4 scenes at MOST, and let the rest be about Superman. A team up can happen for a sequel, especially with a post-credits teaser.

 

[Marvin]

Frankly if all this has become is pissing contest, then **** everyone involved in every one of these studios. They are plague on movies and will contribute to the death of the blockbuster as we know it.

No, hollywood has always had that element. To suggest that it's something new and will lead to doom just cause the profit scale has gotten so big is..odd.

When a new paradigm for profit becomes apparent studios take on the necessary approach...unless you think Dreamworks just decided to invest in cgi animation on a creative whim.
People arguing against this would be like people arguing for Dreamworks to have tried to compete with pixar by investing more into their traditional animation.

Funny enough if you want to see the death of the precious "blockbuster" you just need for studios to stop trying to compete with each and turn a blind eye to competing in a profit driven market.

 

[Tobias]

You're most insightful post yet imo.
Sorry Tobias but write all the letters you want don't speak for me(and what I want), another such fanboy.

It's like you assume they would open your letter and be, "shut down the studio, the fanboys have spoken, we need to listen to this Tobias, he speaks for the fans..." And when they didn't you proclaimed that the studio doesn't care about fan(boy)s.
If that's the assertion you are making than I suppose I can see why you have been posting the things you have.

Here's a thought, what if the studio received another letter form another fanboy. Say that letter said good job guys, keep doing what you are doing.....lot's of people write to studios dude.

I wrote the letter as I'd approach any film. Mentioning its faults - pacing, dialogue, characterization - but not getting into telling them to use a certain villain or kryptonite ort this or that. I never claimed to speak for fans BTW.

WB is doing this because they think Batman is gold. Not because fanboys want a WF. It is a happy coincidence that both outlooks coincide.

As you said and being generous - a solo MOS might have done 900 million or so. I doubt that. I think the film could have done about like MOS or it may have done better, but its a guess isn't it?

BTW, IronMan 2 did about the same as IronMan. Less domestic than 1, more international than 1, slightly more overall. If it had benn WB they probably would have stopped the IronMan series at that point as it had a tad of the Tomb Raider thing going. But IronMan 3 came along and the rest is history.

WB's mistake I think is that they are assuming Batman is platinum. Plunk him in a film and, no matter the quality of the film (hence bringing back the whole team for WF despite problems with MOS), it will make a billion plus. This ignores the history of Bat films.

Its Nolan/Bale/Batman that is platinum. Unless Bale is cast and Nolan returns full-on, WF won't have that going for it. What if reviews are mixed? What if audiences don't take to the new Batman?

I'd day 900 million to a billion could be all that WF does. Then what? Avengers at maybe 2 billion trounces DC's top two characters. Doubles their box. Imagine the buzz that would cause.

If that were to happen you can forget JL and probably any more CBMs from WB for a while - except perhaps for Batman.

The point is there is no need to get in a pissing contest with Marvel that you know you will lose. WB should take their time with WF and move it away from summer 2015. I think its possible they will move the films date and especially if there are script or filming issues.

 

[Tra-El]

but its a guess isn't it?

EVERYTHING you say....is a guess.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

But that would be the RIGHT thing to do. Give Batman 3 or 4 scenes at MOST, and let the rest be about Superman. A team up can happen for a sequel, especially with a post-credits teaser.

Well, if it were for me, I would have a Superman sequel for Superman only. I know crazy stuff.

But I doubt they were going to happen through this whole thing just to have him in a cameo.

 

[Marvin]

I wrote the letter as I'd approach any film. Mentioning its faults - pacing, dialogue, characterization - but not getting into telling them to use a certain villain or kryptonite ort this or that. I never claimed to speak for fans BTW.

You wrote:
"Supposedly WB doesn't give a fig about the fans but only what the GA wants. When I wrote my letters to WB and mentioned them here the consensus seemed to be that WB could care less what I, the fanboy, wants. "
My mistake if I misunderstood, but it seemed you wrote the studio a letter telling them things that were on your mind, then when they ignored you, then went on to assume they don't care about the fanboy which I took as "the fans".

WB is doing this because they think Batman is gold. Not because fanboys want a WF. It is a happy coincidence that both outlooks coincide.

WB is doing this cause they want to universe build. They wanted to do the same with TDK series but for some reason they hit a road block(nolan). They are also doing it because they know fanboys will flock to a WF movie. I mean I assume those were fanboys in Hall H celebrating the announcement and cause all that buzz....then again maybe it was that they just love bale so much.

As you said and being generous - a solo MOS might have done 900 million or so. I doubt that. I think the film could have done about like MOS or it may have done better, but its a guess isn't it?

BTW, IronMan 2 did about the same as IronMan. Less domestic than 1, more international than 1, slightly more overall. If it had benn WB they probably would have stopped the IronMan series at that point as it had a tad of the Tomb Raider thing going. But IronMan 3 came along and the rest is history.

So you think WB thinks MOS2 is going to disappoint the general audience and make as much MOS does with no financial improvement(I find that odd seeing as you want a MOS sequel so badly). I suppose it could happen. I mean ASM2 could do less then ASM1 even without the obstacles that reboot faced. Anything is possible.

WB's mistake I think is that they are assuming Batman is platinum. Plunk him in a film and, no matter the quality of the film (hence bringing back the whole team for WF despite problems with MOS), it will make a billion plus. This ignores the history of Bat films.

WB knows without bale and nolan that batman isn't the same draw, perhaps this is why instead of just a batman reboot that will no doubt make reboot money(a number sure to disappoint you), they instead plan on re-introducing a new untested batman in an established superman cross over.

And are you implying that the MOS quality is the same as the Batman history quality? I wouldn't be surprised. Let's again ignore that it's making ASM/Ironman revenue and lump it in with bat history.

Its Nolan/Bale/Batman that is platinum. Unless Bale is cast and Nolan returns full-on, WF won't have that going for it. What if reviews are mixed? What if audiences don't take to the new Batman?

I'd day 900 million to a billion could be all that WF does. Then what? Avengers at maybe 2 billion trounces DC's top two characters. Doubles their box. Imagine the buzz that would cause.

If everything goes wrong then sure it's another 1billion dollar film for WB(they don't have that many) and a successful launch to their cinematic universe(call it the im2 of universe building steps if you want). The buzz would be that WF didn't match avengers numbers and you know what, that makes sense, a sequel to avengers has alot going for it. However, what happens if everything doesn't go wrong? What happens if this is a success? Then you have to compare the success of an MOS2 vs a WF, Seems like a no brainer.

Moreover you might be putting too much faith into what it is Bale brings to batman. Sure he has a draw with the audience no doubt. But to imply that he's been doing something on screen that another capable actor has no shot at? This isn't Ironman. All bale does that's unique imo is that stupid voice.

If that were to happen you can forget JL and probably any more CBMs from WB for a while - except perhaps for Batman.

If WF makes a 900 million and doesn't lose WB a single dime I'm pretty sure it won't be the end of their CBMs...

The point is there is no need to get in a pissing contest with Marvel that you know you will lose. WB should take their time with WF and move it away from summer 2015. I think its possible they will move the films date and especially if there are script or filming issues.

WB should just hold off on JLA for about 6 years(one year for each solo). No point in messing with Marvel when they can't win given the head start on success. Even if the market is prime and ready for this exact brand.

WB has two years to make WF, what exactly is the rush you are talking about? Another superman solo?

 

[jmc]

No, hollywood has always had that element. To suggest that it's something new and will lead to doom just cause the profit scale has gotten so big is..odd.

When a new paradigm for profit becomes apparent studios take on the necessary approach...unless you think Dreamworks just decided to invest in cgi animation on a creative whim.
People arguing against this would be like people arguing for Dreamworks to have tried to compete with pixar by investing more into their traditional animation.

Funny enough if you want to see the death of the precious "blockbuster" you just need for studios to stop trying to compete with each and turn a blind eye to competing in a profit driven market.

Did I say it was something new? I'm talking about the scale of it will lead to the death of the blockbuster as we know it because only a select few films are ever going to be able to make the kind of money things like Avatar and Star Wars can. Once studios realise this they won't bother trying to hit those same heights, won't invest in big budget movies as much and all we'll be left with are those select few franchises being the big event films each and every year. Forgive me for not being excited to see Star Wars episode 27. So yeah, this profit hunger has gotten out of control, to the point it risks the collapse of how movies are made as we know it.

 

[Marvin]

So you weren't talking about the pissing contest nature that has been present since the start of block busters, but this new scale, my mistake.

I personally don't see anything wrong with WB capitalizing on a specific market they have full rights on but have never fully tapped into before now.

As for the scale of blockbusters, Hollywood derives a good amount of it's profits from this thing. Pretty sure hollywood is going to keep trying to do so. The alternative being they just depend on their art film departments?

 

[jmc]

So you weren't talking about the pissing contest nature that has been present since the start of block busters, but this new scale, my mistake.

I personally don't see anything wrong with WB capitalizing on a specific market they have full rights on but have never fully tapped into before now.

As for the scale of blockbusters, Hollywood derives a good amount of it's profits from this thing. Pretty sure hollywood is going to keep trying to do so. The alternative being they just depend on their art film departments?

I just read back my original post and realised it could have been misinterpreted, that was my fault for not being clear enough as to the context I was referring to. The thing with blockbusters now is that the break-even point is getting higher and higher, on top of that film budgets are getting higher and higher, we are at this absurd stage where $200M+ films are no longer the exception - that's an unsustainable model. Eventually this new found pissing contest is going to be bad for everyone. Studios will eventually realise they can't compete with each others event films because of unreal expectations and won't invest in as many big budget movies as before, they're already too scared to fork over money for original blockbusters. We get a select few 'mega-franchises' which will dominate the box office until a time comes when audiences tire of the model, further screwing up how things are. Hollywood has to start pulling itself in, studios have to apply the breaks, step back and reassess the situation because it's a recipe for disaster. The amount of money they are spending and are aiming for now is ridiculous. The great irony in all this is money spent on advertising. We now live in a world where information travels fast and where a 2min Youtube video can get 10 millions views in a couple of days, yet more and more money is being spent on promoting movies. How the hell does that work?

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

You wrote:
"Supposedly WB doesn't give a fig about the fans but only what the GA wants. When I wrote my letters to WB and mentioned them here the consensus seemed to be that WB could care less what I, the fanboy, wants. "
My mistake if I misunderstood, but it seemed you wrote the studio a letter telling them things that were on your mind, then when they ignored you, then went on to assume they don't care about the fanboy which I took as "the fans".


WB is doing this cause they want to universe build. They wanted to do the same with TDK series but for some reason they hit a road block(nolan). They are also doing it because they know fanboys will flock to a WF movie. I mean I assume those were fanboys in Hall H celebrating the announcement and cause all that buzz....then again maybe it was that they just love bale so much.

So you think WB thinks MOS2 is going to disappoint the general audience and make as much MOS does with no financial improvement(I find that odd seeing as you want a MOS sequel so badly). I suppose it could happen. I mean ASM2 could do less then ASM1 even without the obstacles that reboot faced. Anything is possible.

WB knows without bale and nolan that batman isn't the same draw, perhaps this is why instead of just a batman reboot that will no doubt make reboot money(a number sure to disappoint you), they instead plan on re-introducing a new untested batman in an established superman cross over.

And are you implying that the MOS quality is the same as the Batman history quality? I wouldn't be surprised. Let's again ignore that it's making ASM/Ironman revenue and lump it in with bat history.


If everything goes wrong then sure it's another 1billion dollar film for WB(they don't have that many) and a successful launch to their cinematic universe(call it the im2 of universe building steps if you want). The buzz would be that WF didn't match avengers numbers and you know what, that makes sense, a sequel to avengers has alot going for it. However, what happens if everything doesn't go wrong? What happens if this is a success? Then you have to compare the success of an MOS2 vs a WF, Seems like a no brainer.

Moreover you might be putting too much faith into what it is Bale brings to batman. Sure he has a draw with the audience no doubt. But to imply that he's been doing something on screen that another capable actor has no shot at? This isn't Ironman. All bale does that's unique imo is that stupid voice.


If WF makes a 900 million and doesn't lose WB a single dime I'm pretty sure it won't be the end of their CBMs...


WB should just hold off on JLA for about 6 years(one year for each solo). No point in messing with Marvel when they can't win given the head start on success. Even if the market is prime and ready for this exact brand.

WB has two years to make WF, what exactly is the rush you are talking about? Another superman solo?

Exactly. We don't have Green Arrow in the features. They can't even get Wonder Woman on TELIVISION (though the TV show was a disaster waiting to happen). Green Lantern is their only attempt to bring to life a prominent DC hero. Catwoman doesn't count, cuz it's a different character than the one from the comics. Jonah Hex is pretty obscure.

Wow. Nolan seems heaven sent on reflection, and Snyder would do a lot better than WB tends to do, if they let him make the features the way he wants.

 

[Marvin]

I just read back my original post and realised it could have been misinterpreted, that was my fault for not being clear enough as to the context I was referring to. The thing with blockbusters now is that the break-even point is getting higher and higher, on top of that film budgets are getting higher and higher, we are at this absurd stage where $200M+ films are no longer the exception - that's an unsustainable model. Eventually this new found pissing contest is going to be bad for everyone. Studios will eventually realise they can't compete with each others event films because of unreal expectations and won't invest in as many big budget movies as before, they're already too scared to fork over money for original blockbusters. We get a select few 'mega-franchises' which will dominate the box office until a time comes when audiences tire of the model, further screwing up how things are. Hollywood has to start pulling itself in, studios have to apply the breaks, step back and reassess the situation because it's a recipe for disaster. The amount of money they are spending and are aiming for now is ridiculous. The great irony in all this is money spent on advertising. We now live in a world where information travels fast and where a 2min Youtube video can get 10 millions views in a couple of days, yet more and more money is being spent on promoting movies. How the hell does that work?

Rising production costs was inevitable. Inflation is what it is. Although 200mill plus is sometimes overboard 100mill would have inflated up to 200mill eventually.

personally I think if hollywood develops a new model where they invest/green light fewer bigger summer fare than all the better. No need for a summer full of 30 so so investments. I'd take less than half of that with bigger results to be honest.
Smaller riskier films will always have their place in other movie seasons.

I suppose it hurts in someways.

 

[Tobias]

If that quote is legit, I for once agree with WB over the filmmaker. Because I wasn't excited about a solo film that just had Superman and a new Lex Luthor with possibly Metallo or something created by Lex. It felt boring to me

I disagree if what you are saying is that interesting solo Superman films or stories can't be made/written.

Thor, Cap, Batman, FF can get interesting solo films but Superman can't?!

I was disappointed with MOS but don't think it or SR are indicators that good Superman films can't be made. I think there are good Superman stories that can be made into films.

 

[shauner111]

I disagree if what you are saying is that interesting solo Superman films or stories can't be made/written.

Thor, Cap, Batman, FF can get interesting solo films but Superman can't?!

I was disappointed with MOS but don't think it or SR are indicators that good Superman films can't be made. I think there are good Superman stories that can be made into films.

That's not what I said. What I mean is, we were going to get a Superman movie where Lex is the villain anyway and he may create something like Metallo. There wasn't going to be Brainiac, Doomsday, etc...even Cavill said it was too early for Brainiac. So with those ingredients, yes, I was bored of the thought of THAT movie.

A Superman solo film down the line with Brainiac? Sign me the F up! But now we not only get the whole Lex/Daily Planet-Clark thing but we have Batman included in on that. Especially a reboot, which is exciting. So I think WB made the right decision and I thank them for "forcing" the concept on Snyder.

 

[Tobias]

That's not what I said. What I mean is, we were going to get a Superman movie where Lex is the villain anyway and he may create something like Metallo. There wasn't going to be Brainiac, Doomsday, etc...even Cavill said it was too early for Brainiac. So with those ingredients, yes, I was bored of the thought of THAT movie.

A Superman solo film down the line with Brainiac? Sign me the F up! But now we not only get the whole Lex/Daily Planet-Clark thing but we have Batman included in on that. Especially a reboot, which is exciting. So I think WB made the right decision and I thank them for "forcing" the concept on Snyder.

Just so long as we get to that solo Superman film at some point with Brainiac and/or Darkside. I don't want to wait a decade for the next.

I agree that for WB this makes sense since they are doing the film for 2015 and not 2016. Summer 2015's schedule of films is scary - in terms of the huge competition. Several billion dollar established franchises and all. I think the studios may be making a mistake scheduling all these films in the summer of 2015 but we will see.

What I don't want to see happen is, after a huge JL, they do Flash and WW and both do better at the BO than MOS. In large part because of the boost of JL. Thor2 could double Thor1 and do 800 million because of the Avengers boost. I am cool with Flash and WW but want a Superman film shortly after also so it gets the same boost and can be more accurately compared to Flash and WW in terms of performance.

 

[ConnorKon-El]

WB had money on their minds. WELP.