The Cinematic Universe Takeover

[writer0327]

Is this latest and greatest craze of cinematic universes (CU) the way franchises will get made going forward, or is this just a flashy trend?

It used to be if you made a solid film, you'd go out and do a sequel, and cross your fingers and hope that did well, and if it did, you'd squeeze a trilogy out of it if you could, and then move on. If somehow you could stretch that original idea into a 4th film, you were doing something.

The CU has taken over the minds of Hollywood execs. I liken it to the dark side of the force: "Quicker, easier, more seductive." CUs offer a quick path to create film franchises without knowing if the first film is any good. If the first one bombs, you can cut your losses, but if it hits, you have 5-15 more films in the tank ready to get greenlit. Hollywood has figured out audiences prefer large, long interconnected stories and continuing sagas. There's only two ways to do it: a TV series, or a CU.

Also, as long as you have some paper thin connection from one film to another, you can create a CU out of nothing. A throwaway reference here, an end credits scene there is all you need. Think about the Shyamalan universe. The only thing connecting those films is a reference. Characters, plot, story, etc. all completely different. But one simple reference and they are now a boxset.

Agree? Disagree?

 

[DOBSON10]

There's no doubt in my mind that Hollywood will milk this concept dry, just like they are doing with re-booting/re-doing every big hit pretty much ever made. Just read IMDB's home page, pretty much every day there is a new "Studio to reboot X franchise" article.

Whenever Hollywood finds one thing that works, they beat it until it's dead and then beat it some more.

 

[DJ Kornphlake]

I'm sure studios will try, but I can't see it lasting outside of the Marvel and DC movies. Comic book movies are easy to make into CUs, because their source material is full of crossovers. There really aren't other intellectual properties that lend themselves so easily to create a CU with.

 

[Teelie]

It isn't a new concept but it has been taken to a new level. They want to copy Marvel's success but as we've clearly seen, that is not easy. DC is still struggling with it, Universal has made a mess of it (with several false starts) and so far no one else has even gotten close to replicating it.

Will it succeed? I don't see why it can't, with good movies inter-connected and given a decent connective tissue between them. The problem is Hollywood's arch-nemesis: Writing good stories, with good actors and a reliable director helming it. And not blatantly cashing in on whatever the movie (franchise) is.

 

[Drizzle]

I think the trend will start to fade out by 2020.

After Avengers 4, Marvel will still have Spider-Man, sure, but I don't think anything they put out there will reach the success of the Downey-Evans-Hemsworth era once they all leave the franchise. DC is still on shaky ground but Wonder Woman being a success really saved their asses a bit. The X-Men movies will survive if their output improves from Apocalypse, but it'll really be Deadpool that will bring audiences in.

Everything else has either failed on takeoff (the Universal monster Dark Universe) or doesn't have enough gas to go for more than maybe 5 movies before the novelty wears off and people get tired of them (Legendary's Monsterverse).

The only one that's truly immune is Star Wars, but I wouldn't even really call that a shared universe franchise.

 

[Grootster]

I like the idea of connected universes, but the filmmakers have to be willing to go all the way if they want to do it. Also, not every cinematic universe can (or should) follow the Marvel formula, for instance not every series needs to have a Nick Fury-type character and a team of Avengers-like characters..

I do agree with the people who say the idea will begin to fade out soon. It just requires too much forethought and planning, and not enough filmmakers are willing to do that. I think some of these terribly lazy cinematic universes that have popped up recently like the universal "Dark Universe" and the Cloverfield universe will begin to kill the fad.

 

[writer0327]

I think the trend will start to fade out by 2020.

After Avengers 4, Marvel will still have Spider-Man, sure, but I don't think anything they put out there will reach the success of the Downey-Evans-Hemsworth era once they all leave the franchise. DC is still on shaky ground but Wonder Woman being a success really saved their asses a bit. The X-Men movies will survive if their output improves from Apocalypse, but it'll really be Deadpool that will bring audiences in.

Everything else has either failed on takeoff (the Universal monster Dark Universe) or doesn't have enough gas to go for more than maybe 5 movies before the novelty wears off and people get tired of them (Legendary's Monsterverse).

The only one that's truly immune is Star Wars, but I wouldn't even really call that a shared universe franchise.

I think SW is a shared universe of sorts, especially as they continue to build out the past with films like Rogue One and Han Solo. I also don't think it is immune either from some CU fatigue, especially if their main films continually play in that "Rebels vs Empire" arena. You can only play the same notes for so long.

 

[:eek:]

I don't think it will work in the long run. It's kinda stupid to announce a shared universe, several movies even before the first one is released and you don't know if it's going to be a success or not. Universal's so called "dark universe" wasn't exactly off to a great start with The Mummy, even if it might have done enough for Universal to go forward with other movies. The latest Transformers performed badly after the announcement of expanding the franchise with spinoffs. Even something like Star Wars won't be safe from franchise-fatigue. While I suppose you can say Rogue One did good the worldwide numbers for it didn't exactly impress, being just about half of what Force Awakens did.

 

[DrCosmic]

I think the trend will start to fade out by 2020.

After Avengers 4, Marvel will still have Spider-Man, sure, but I don't think anything they put out there will reach the success of the Downey-Evans-Hemsworth era once they all leave the franchise.

This seems highly unlikely. Not only are Downey-Evans-Hemsworth not the best actors or playing the best characters that Marvel has available to them, and no one's turning up their noses at so much as a Dr. Strange sequel, much less Strange, Panther, Spider-Man, Ant-Man and Captain Marvel teaming up, but can't even be sure Downey Evans and Hemsworth would turn up their noses either.

And as long as the MCU is making a billion and a half a year, no one is going to give up trying to get their own CU. There's too much money to give up on, even if it costs a lot of money. They figure if this little studio can do this, why couldn't a big one? And there's two challenges:

No Mastermind: A big studio isn't going to have power and vision consolidated into one person, and a CU needs a very specific direction and strategy, not based on popular opinon but with SOME artistic intent. This is what DC is missing with WB, Johns is neither a suitable talent, nor does he have suitable power.

No Universe: Marvel's killer app is that they have 60 years of hype-building and pre-production done by dozens of incredible creators (and hundreds of okay-ish ones). For instance, if you tell a set designer you want The Avengers Mansion, that gives them a ton to work with. DC has this, the Universal Monsters do not. This is the mistake Paramount or whoever are making with the Valiant "universe," thinking that the thing is superheroes, but it's not, it really is the amount of time spent developing a universe, and the fans of that universe.

If you're a movie exec, you basically need to start a Marvel Studios... give a singular producer power over this "indy" style independent division, you get a huge cut after a big budget, and time to actually develop a full universe, maybe even give dozens of creators time, maybe a full year to essentially work on a big budget TV show without having to actually produce anything yet. Do that three or four times and one of them is likely to land. I don't think big studios have the ability to do this, because they need too much control and are accountable to their investors for being trendy, which means that a consistent vision can't be allowed to work, and even if a Marvel Studios clone were to be successful, there's no change of it breaking off away from its Ike Perlmutter the way the MCU did.

So, basically, it's hopeless, but I'm sure they'll keep trying. Hopefully someone will figure out that you can do this same thing with any genre: Comedy, Drama, Less Superheroic Action. Thrillers. That's probably the next wave coming, as cinema catches up with comics more directly instead of just trying to copy paste: the team up film.

 

[psylockolussus]

A lot of traditional sequels are already underperforming so eh. Some could succeed like Monster verse but others like Dark Universe will have a hard time to stay afloat.

A movie's success leading to sequels/spin offs is the classic approach when it comes to franchise building. The masses will not eat up every cinematic universe.

 

[Thundarr]

I agree with some of the other posters on here. Extended Cinematic Universes are nothing new. Movies have been using them with varying degrees of success since the 1930's. Look at all of the Universal Monster movies for example. Dracula Meets Frankenstein. Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman. Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein. The list goes on and on. Then of course there's King Kong vs Godzilla. Then the popularity of these types of ECU's waned, and then in the 1980's we started getting sequels upon sequels upon sequels, especially with horror films (Friday The 13th, Nightmare On Elm Street, Halloween, etc). And now we've come full circle and are doing ECU's again.

They certainly have proven to be successful at the BO, at least in the Marvel ECU. DC's ECU is showing promise, at least with their Justice League movie. As for any other ECU, I guess we'll have to wait and see before we ca judge.

Is this just the latest fad in Hollywood right now? Maybe. Will it fade away like most Hollywood fads do? Probably. Will they all be failures at recapturing Marvel's success? I doubt it.

There are a lot of factors that go into making a successful ECU franchise. Most have been explained in detail here, so I won't bore you by regurgitating them all here. I'll just say that with the right franchise, and the right creative team behind it, and proper planning, it CAN be done.

 

[OfficerK]

I dunno but i'm not a fan of it. Like for example I liked the newer Wonder Woman movie, but when you throw her in there with all these other superheroes in the same movie universe it kind of cheapens how special or unique she is supposed to be in that world. It just feels cheesy to me in a way...in the same way Aliens vs Predator felt cheesy. I don't think its a new idea but it's like they've re invented it for marvel and DC or something. Maybe they are just running out of ideas for individual superhero movies so now they are just mashing them all into one ****show of a movie here n there.

 

[writer0327]

This seems highly unlikely. Not only are Downey-Evans-Hemsworth not the best actors or playing the best characters that Marvel has available to them, and no one's turning up their noses at so much as a Dr. Strange sequel, much less Strange, Panther, Spider-Man, Ant-Man and Captain Marvel teaming up, but can't even be sure Downey Evans and Hemsworth would turn up their noses either.

And as long as the MCU is making a billion and a half a year, no one is going to give up trying to get their own CU. There's too much money to give up on, even if it costs a lot of money. They figure if this little studio can do this, why couldn't a big one? And there's two challenges:

No Mastermind: A big studio isn't going to have power and vision consolidated into one person, and a CU needs a very specific direction and strategy, not based on popular opinon but with SOME artistic intent. This is what DC is missing with WB, Johns is neither a suitable talent, nor does he have suitable power.

No Universe: Marvel's killer app is that they have 60 years of hype-building and pre-production done by dozens of incredible creators (and hundreds of okay-ish ones). For instance, if you tell a set designer you want The Avengers Mansion, that gives them a ton to work with. DC has this, the Universal Monsters do not. This is the mistake Paramount or whoever are making with the Valiant "universe," thinking that the thing is superheroes, but it's not, it really is the amount of time spent developing a universe, and the fans of that universe.

If you're a movie exec, you basically need to start a Marvel Studios... give a singular producer power over this "indy" style independent division, you get a huge cut after a big budget, and time to actually develop a full universe, maybe even give dozens of creators time, maybe a full year to essentially work on a big budget TV show without having to actually produce anything yet. Do that three or four times and one of them is likely to land. I don't think big studios have the ability to do this, because they need too much control and are accountable to their investors for being trendy, which means that a consistent vision can't be allowed to work, and even if a Marvel Studios clone were to be successful, there's no change of it breaking off away from its Ike Perlmutter the way the MCU did.

So, basically, it's hopeless, but I'm sure they'll keep trying. Hopefully someone will figure out that you can do this same thing with any genre: Comedy, Drama, Less Superheroic Action. Thrillers. That's probably the next wave coming, as cinema catches up with comics more directly instead of just trying to copy paste: the team up film.

I'm thinking if the larger, big budget CU doesn't work, studios may try and mimic the Conjuring Universe. Look at these numbers for the 4 films thus far.

Budget: $81.5M
WW Box Office Gross: $975M

Spending less than $100M and by the second weekend of Annabelle: Creation, they will have made over $1B. "The Nun" is on the way next year, probably with a similar small budget in the neighborhood of $20M, which it will likely double in it's first weekend.

Horror seems to be the perfect genre for the CU trend, which is why its so peculiar that the "Dark Universe" decided to go towards the big budget, action adventure style.

 

[Thundarr]

This seems highly unlikely. Not only are Downey-Evans-Hemsworth not the best actors or playing the best characters that Marvel has available to them, and no one's turning up their noses at so much as a Dr. Strange sequel, much less Strange, Panther, Spider-Man, Ant-Man and Captain Marvel teaming up, but can't even be sure Downey Evans and Hemsworth would turn up their noses either.

And as long as the MCU is making a billion and a half a year, no one is going to give up trying to get their own CU. There's too much money to give up on, even if it costs a lot of money. They figure if this little studio can do this, why couldn't a big one? And there's two challenges:

No Mastermind: A big studio isn't going to have power and vision consolidated into one person, and a CU needs a very specific direction and strategy, not based on popular opinon but with SOME artistic intent. This is what DC is missing with WB, Johns is neither a suitable talent, nor does he have suitable power.

No Universe: Marvel's killer app is that they have 60 years of hype-building and pre-production done by dozens of incredible creators (and hundreds of okay-ish ones). For instance, if you tell a set designer you want The Avengers Mansion, that gives them a ton to work with. DC has this, the Universal Monsters do not. This is the mistake Paramount or whoever are making with the Valiant "universe," thinking that the thing is superheroes, but it's not, it really is the amount of time spent developing a universe, and the fans of that universe.

If you're a movie exec, you basically need to start a Marvel Studios... give a singular producer power over this "indy" style independent division, you get a huge cut after a big budget, and time to actually develop a full universe, maybe even give dozens of creators time, maybe a full year to essentially work on a big budget TV show without having to actually produce anything yet. Do that three or four times and one of them is likely to land. I don't think big studios have the ability to do this, because they need too much control and are accountable to their investors for being trendy, which means that a consistent vision can't be allowed to work, and even if a Marvel Studios clone were to be successful, there's no change of it breaking off away from its Ike Perlmutter the way the MCU did.

So, basically, it's hopeless, but I'm sure they'll keep trying. Hopefully someone will figure out that you can do this same thing with any genre: Comedy, Drama, Less Superheroic Action. Thrillers. That's probably the next wave coming, as cinema catches up with comics more directly instead of just trying to copy paste: the team up film.

I agree with pretty much everything you said except for the bold part. I think that it's extremely difficult to create an ECU, but it's far from hopeless. Let's look at a hypothetical.

Let's say that Universal decides that they want to try rebooting the Conan The Barbarian franchise, and they want to create a Conan Cinematic Universe. The first obstacle is that there are very few characters in the Conan stories aside from Conan himself that they can make movies out of. One is Red Sonja, so they acquire the rights to the character. After that they have to get creative. So they buy the rights to other movies of the same genre that are ambiguous as to where they take place, thus allowing some creative license with the characters. They buy up The Beastmaster, Deathstalker, Ator The Fighting Eagle, Hawk The Slayer, and pretty much any other "Sword & Sorcery" or "High Fantasy" film they can get their hands on (especially those with a strong cult following). They start cranking out these movies, sometimes even shooting two or more of them at once. Then at some point some of these characters meet up in a crossover. Maybe even doing a huge multi-character team up.

As long as the individual films are well made, and the connecting thread makes sense and doesn't seem forced, the movies and the Extended Conan Cinematic Universe would most likely be a great success.

Actually, that's not such a bad idea. Get started on that Universal!

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

I am tired of people attempting CUs because it is starting to get lame and just reeks of copying. The comic book ones work because they have a long history of sharing stories. Also haven't Kong and Godzilla shared the screen before? Universal needed to actually make some decent monster movies as opposed to trying to sell The Mummy by labeling it as the start of a CU. I like Dracula Untold but apparently that film isn't connected to The Mummy movie. So now there are 3 of their monster films that have failed.
Mostly I'm just tired of studios copying Marvel.

 

[TheVileOne]

I agree with some of the other posters on here. Extended Cinematic Universes are nothing new. Movies have been using them with varying degrees of success since the 1930's. Look at all of the Universal Monster movies for example. Dracula Meets Frankenstein. Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman. Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein. The list goes on and on. Then of course there's King Kong vs Godzilla. Then the popularity of these types of ECU's waned, and then in the 1980's we started getting sequels upon sequels upon sequels, especially with horror films (Friday The 13th, Nightmare On Elm Street, Halloween, etc). And now we've come full circle and are doing ECU's again.

They certainly have proven to be successful at the BO, at least in the Marvel ECU. DC's ECU is showing promise, at least with their Justice League movie. As for any other ECU, I guess we'll have to wait and see before we ca judge.

Is this just the latest fad in Hollywood right now? Maybe. Will it fade away like most Hollywood fads do? Probably. Will they all be failures at recapturing Marvel's success? I doubt it.

There are a lot of factors that go into making a successful ECU franchise. Most have been explained in detail here, so I won't bore you by regurgitating them all here. I'll just say that with the right franchise, and the right creative team behind it, and proper planning, it CAN be done.

It kind of is. They didn't call them cinematic universes back then. Abbott and Costello was just a fun comedy crossover, like Scooby Doo meeting Batman and such.

Godzilla vs. King Kong was hardly some grand shared universe idea. It wasn't a sequel to the classic original King Kong film. It was just Godzilla fighting a giant gorilla.

 

[writer0327]

I agree with pretty much everything you said except for the bold part. I think that it's extremely difficult to create an ECU, but it's far from hopeless. Let's look at a hypothetical.

Let's say that Universal decides that they want to try rebooting the Conan The Barbarian franchise, and they want to create a Conan Cinematic Universe. The first obstacle is that there are very few characters in the Conan stories aside from Conan himself that they can make movies out of. One is Red Sonja, so they acquire the rights to the character. After that they have to get creative. So they buy the rights to other movies of the same genre that are ambiguous as to where they take place, thus allowing some creative license with the characters. They buy up The Beastmaster, Deathstalker, Ator The Fighting Eagle, Hawk The Slayer, and pretty much any other "Sword & Sorcery" or "High Fantasy" film they can get their hands on (especially those with a strong cult following). They start cranking out these movies, sometimes even shooting two or more of them at once. Then at some point some of these characters meet up in a crossover. Maybe even doing a huge multi-character team up.

As long as the individual films are well made, and the connecting thread makes sense and doesn't seem forced, the movies and the Extended Conan Cinematic Universe would most likely be a great success.

Actually, that's not such a bad idea. Get started on that Universal!

My brothers and I used to play Beastmaster vs Conan as kids. I would LOVE this!

 

[Thundarr]

My brothers and I used to play Beastmaster vs Conan as kids. I would LOVE this!

My friends and I would play Conan & Beastmaster team ups when we were kids. I'd be Conan, one of my friends would be Dar. And then another friend would be Subotai or Seth. Then we'd fight imaginary bad guys with our plastic or wooden swords.

The beauty part of this idea is that, with the exception of Conan and Red Sonja, none of these characters come from a very highly developed setting. Technically the movies Beastmaster and Deathstalker could have taken place in The Hyborian Age as well, just in a different area than Conan did.

A Conan Cinematic Universe could have characters from one or more of the other movies make a cameo appearance in the current movie. For example, Red Sonja could be in the background of a tavern scene in Conan. Conan glances at her, admiring her beauty, but that's the extent of their interaction. Then in the Red Sonja movie, they show the same scene except with the focus being on Sonja and Conan is the one in the background. And they can have similar scenes with Beastmaster and Deathstalker.

 

[Thundarr]

It kind of is. They didn't call them cinematic universes back then. Abbott and Costello was just a fun comedy crossover, like Scooby Doo meeting Batman and such.

Godzilla vs. King Kong was hardly some grand shared universe idea. It wasn't a sequel to the classic original King Kong film. It was just Godzilla fighting a giant gorilla.

They didn't call them Cinematic Universes back then, but that's essentially what all of those Universal Monster movie crossovers were. But a rose by any other name, blah blah blah blah. In order for Dracula to fight The Wolfman, or Frankenstein, or whoever, then Dracula must share a Cinematic Universe with these other monsters. I listed Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein because that movie includes not only Frankenstein's Monster, but also Dracula, The Wolfman, and even a cameo appearance by The Invisible Man. This makes this a classic example of an ECU for the Universal Monsters. A serious example? No, but an example nonetheless.

 

[Spiderine]

There have been novelty films in the past where characters crossed over.

Kong/Godzilla
Jason/Freddy
Alien/Predator
Universal classics

But there has never in the history of cinema have we gotten anything in size scope and scale that Marvel has been able to accomplish over the course of ten years. Singular franchises all successful to different degrees that would have culminated in a massive ensemble film. The most expensive ever.

In order to get to that point, you must have achieved a level of critical and commercial success across the spectrum of films the studio made. A growing fanbase with each film. Trust of the brand from general audiences. A Kevin Feige like pioneer who has piloted the whole thing under a vision.

The problem for everyone else is they just want to copy and cash in on the trend. DC is probably the only entity that could have done this years ago. They had access to all their characters. The other problem is that these films from multiple studios are cannibalizing each other. Cinematic universe requires yearly releases to keep an audience captivated. One bad film can derail the whole thing.

 

[Thundarr]

My brothers and I used to play Beastmaster vs Conan as kids. I would LOVE this!

The Conan Cinematic Universe ​

Conan The Barbarian: This would have to be a sequel to the 2011 film, and a soft reboot of the 1982 original movie. Conan (played once again by Jason Mamoa) and his love interest from the previous movie are expecting a child and settle down in a small Cimmerian village. One day Conan goes out hunting. When he is gone the village is attacked by Thulsa Doom (played by Denzel Washington) and his cult of Set worshipers. The villagers are massacred, Conan’s wife is cut open, and his unborn son is sacrificed to the god Set. Conan goes on a quest for revenge. Along the way he meets the Hyrkanian thief Subotai (played by Kane Kosygin) and “The Queen Of Thieves” Valeria (played by Uma Thurman). By the end of the movie we learn that the witch that the villain of the previous movie was trying to resurrect was the daughter of Thulsa Doom, and the attack on Conan was targeted.

Red Sonja: This would be both a remake of the 1985 film and a new adaptation of the comics. Queen Gedrine (played by Rosie O’Donnell) orders Sonja’s family murdered as punishment for refusing her sexual advances. Sonja (played by Kristanna Loken) is raped by her soldiers and left for dead. She is granted the power to seek revenge by the goddess Scathach in return for a vow of chastity. Should she ever bed a man who does not first defeat her in one on one combat, she would lose her skill with the sword. On her quest for revenge, she is joined by Valar The Unconquerable Claw (played by Vin Diesel) and Malak the Thief (played by Michael Hurst). Unlike Tracy Walters’ version of the character in Conan the Destroyer, this Malak will be less of a buffoon and more competent/badass.

The Beastmaster: This would be pretty much a straight up remake of the 1982 movie. The evil priest Maax (now played by Mickey Rourke) will be changed to a priest of Set. The Juns might be renamed as well. The movie would star Liam Hemsworth in the titular role of Dar the Beastmaster, and would follow the original story almost note for note (minus the deus ex machina of the winged devourers).

Deathstalker: This would be a straight up remake of the 1983 Roger Coreman film, but with a higher budget and greater production values. It would star Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson in the titular role of Deathstalker, and Gary Oldman as the evil wizard Munkar. The biggest difference, aside from the above mentioned budget and production values, would be a more in-depth look at Deathstalker’s back story. Who is he? How did he get the name “Deathstalker”? Where did he come from? What is his relationship with the witch that sent him on his quest? Why is he such a badass fighter? Why is he such a *****e?

The Barbarians: This would be a straight up remake of the 1987 comedy/adventure of the same name, which starred twin bodybuilders Peter and David Paul. It would be a less campy, more serious version of the story. It would star Dave Batista in the dual roles of twin brothers Kutchek and Goro (through the magic of CGI & VFX), and Brian Thompson as the evil warlord Kadar.

Hawk The Slayer and Ator The Fighting Eagle: I have not seen these two films in so long that I cannot give them a proper update for the Conan ECU. But I’m sure that those of you who are more familiar with these films than I am can probably come up with something good.

In each of the above mentioned remakes, there will be a mid post credits teaser, showing that the villain from each movie (Thulsa Doom, Maax, Queen Gedrine, Munkar, Kadar, etc) are in fact the lackeys of the true threat, the evil wizard Toth-Amon. Then in a future movie, all of the heroes from the above films will have to team up in order to take him down.

And that is how you do an Extended Cinematic Universe for Conan The Barbarian.

 

[3dman27]

A lot of traditional sequels are already underperforming so eh. Some could succeed like Monster verse but others like Dark Universe will have a hard time to stay afloat.
i

isn't the' monster verse' and the 'dark universe' the same thing ?

 

[The Big G]

Everything else has either failed on takeoff (the Universal monster Dark Universe) or doesn't have enough gas to go for more than maybe 5 movies before the novelty wears off and people get tired of them (Legendary's Monsterverse).

Has the novelty of Toho's monsters ever truly worn off?

No.

Giant Monster/Robot movies are very niche in the west yes, but the fans are wanton with their money.

I saw Godzilla three times in theatres when it came out in 2014.

Now while I doubt Legendary is going to go the Toho route and do Rodan or Mothra movies....I highly doubt people will be tired in seeing them.

 

[Teelie]

isn't the' monster verse' and the 'dark universe' the same thing ?

I am pretty sure the Dark Universe is just a rebranding of what was previously called the Monster Universe. Which has indeed imploded.

 

[The Big G]

I am pretty sure the Dark Universe is just a rebranding of what was previously called the Monster Universe. Which has indeed imploded.

Legendary beat Universal to the trademark office is pretty much what happened.