The Daily Planet - Superman News and Speculation Thread (🚨TAG SPOILERS🚨)

[flickchick85]

James Gunn is a Hollywood figure. His job is to sell the movie and that includes “debunking” things that could be true


This is from a local ABC news affiliate. They have no reason to lie

No but they are a local news outlet and I know from experience those folks can easily misinterpret things, especially when it's reporting on things that they don't usually have to deal with, like film office tax incentive applications. That budget is ludicrous. Especially in the Age of Zaslav, whose first mandate was "cut spending." That should be your first clue they got it wrong. The director/producer outright saying it's incorrect and ridiculous should be your 2nd clue. If you wanna believe it in spite of all that, that's your prerogative.

 

[Venom 1988]

James Gunn is a Hollywood figure. His job is to sell the movie and that includes “debunking” things that could be true


This is from a local ABC news affiliate. They have no reason to lie

Lying =/= misunderstanding the document

 

[TheGDBatman]

James Gunn is a Hollywood figure. His job is to sell the movie and that includes “debunking” things that could be true


This is from a local ABC news affiliate. They have no reason to lie

As @flickchick85 said, no one is saying the reporter lied. It could very well be a case of misinterpretation. Total budget & production budget are different things.

 

[dhandler01]

James Gunn is a Hollywood figure. His job is to sell the movie and that includes “debunking” things that could be true


This is from a local ABC news affiliate. They have no reason to lie

Who said they were lying? Read what flick said that is most likely what is going on here.

James Gunn would not go around debunking some rando Cleveland reporter to CYA. Maybe if it was Variety I would agree with you but not some nobody on a story that has no need for damage control.

 

[dhandler01]

No but they are a local news outlet and I know from experience those folks can easily misinterpret things, especially when it's reporting on things that they don't usually have to deal with, like film office tax incentive applications. That budget is ludicrous. Especially in the Age of Zaslav, whose first mandate was "cut spending." That should be your first clue they got it wrong. The director/producer outright saying it's incorrect and ridiculous should be your 2nd clue. If you wanna believe it in spite of all that, that's your prerogative.

Exactly.

 

[JannTosh]

As @flickchick85 said, no one is saying the reporter lied. It could very well be a case of misinterpretation. Total budget & production budget are different things.

The main explanation is that that number is without any tax incentives gives and rebates. Still will make it a 250M or so movie after that.

 

[JannTosh]

No but they are a local news outlet and I know from experience those folks can easily misinterpret things, especially when it's reporting on things that they don't usually have to deal with, like film office tax incentive applications. That budget is ludicrous. Especially in the Age of Zaslav, whose first mandate was "cut spending." That should be your first clue they got it wrong. The director/producer outright saying it's incorrect and ridiculous should be your 2nd clue. If you wanna believe it in spite of all that, that's your prerogative.

Yes I will trust reporters over Hollywood

 

[flickchick85]

Yes I will trust reporters over Hollywood

Enjoy that narrative.

 

[dhandler01]

As @flickchick85 said, no one is saying the reporter lied. It could very well be a case of misinterpretation. Total budget & production budget are different things.

Yeah...its like when people try and interpret corporate accounting (or say Governmental Budgeting) by using normal accounting practices. There is way more that goes into it than just "2+2=4" but if you don't know where to look, what to look for and how to interpret it it looks completely different than reality. (can you tell I took a bunch of MBA coursework and teach Economics?)

I mean the guy could be right on his conclusions...but I would bet heavy against it.

 

[dhandler01]

Yes I will trust reporters over Hollywood

Hmmm...apropos of nothing are you free next Saturday? We have a poker game coming up and we need a fifth person!

 

[Boom]

Forgive the bluntness of the question, but who ****ing cares?

 

[Lily Adler]

So Brainiac is the secret villain. I'm calling it.

 

[dhandler01]

The main explanation is that that number is without any tax incentives gives and rebates. Still will make it a 250M or so movie after that.

@flickchick85 literally said that 23 minutes ago...

 

[dhandler01]

Forgive the bluntness of the question, but who ****ing cares?

 

[Lily Adler]

For All The Talk of BNW tanking, it ranks No. 2 in trailer views.
Interesting.

Tanking? Perhaps. Lackluster? Probably. A film that had that many reshoots and rewrites is not a good sign.

 

[JannTosh]

Enjoy that narrative.

treating this like a lie doesn't make conceptual sense.

'Genesis,' according to an application with the Ohio Motion Picture Tax Credit program, has a $363 million budget. It's slated to receive an $11 million tax credit from the state. The application states that 25% of the film will be shot in Cincinnati and Cleveland. More than 3,200 Ohio residents are projected to be hired.

You genuinely should presumptively believe a statement like this from a reputable site is telling you something meaningful. This is just genuinely hard evidence that needs to be explained away. Gunn's only counter was "how could they know that" which an article like this can explain.

You can reconcile the statements by a net v. gross budget distinction but Gunn's initial statement/debunking is just not accurate.

 

[flickchick85]

treating this like a lie doesn't make conceptual sense.

You are literally the only person here using the word "lie." The rest of us are saying it's wrong/misinterpreted. That is not the production budget of this film. According to basic common sense AND the director/producer of the film. But if you want to keep thinking it is, more power to ya.

 

[JannTosh]

You are literally the only person here using the word "lie." The rest of us are saying it's wrong/misinterpreted. That is not the production budget of this film. According to basic common sense AND the director/producer of the film. But if you want to keep thinking it is, more power to ya.

That ls what many are insinuating the article is doing. It’s clear this is going to be a very expensive movie.


Blind fanboyism is bad no matter who it is for.

 

[dhandler01]

treating this like a lie doesn't make conceptual sense.


You genuinely should presumptively believe a statement like this from a reputable site is telling you something meaningful. This is just genuinely hard evidence that needs to be explained away. Gunn's only counter was "how could they know that" which an article like this can explain.

You can reconcile the statements by a net v. gross budget distinction but Gunn's initial statement/debunking is just not accurate.

I don't mean this as a slight in any way but...is English not your first language? No one is saying the reporter is lying or even implying it really. All we are saying is a person who has no idea how to interpret something interpreted it incorrectly.

If a child tries reading a book but does not understand what the words mean so they get the meaning of the book wrong they aren't lying they just don't have the vocabulary or knowledge to truly understand. That is basically what we are saying.

 

[dhandler01]

That ls what many are insinuating the article is doing. It’s clear this is going to be a very expansive movie.


Blind fanboyism is bad no matter who it is for.

Literally no one is doing that.

 

[flickchick85]

That ls what many are insinuating the article is doing. It’s clear this is going to be a very expensive movie.


Blind fanboyism is bad no matter who it is for.

Literally no one is insinuating that. And this is not blind fanboyism. It's basic common sense.

 

[Boom]

It’s clear this is going to be a very expensive movie.

Okay. And?

 

[DCDAVE]

Superman trailer really hit home runs with Superman, Clark and Lois, Luther, and Krypto. Mr. Terrific looks serious unlike the CW character. Got to say this I think they hit it out of park with the casting of Guy Gardener. Nathan was born to play this role.

We just need 30 seconds of Supes for the Super Bowl of him flying and I think we save the story trailer for Thunderbolts. What ever you do James don’t do a BVS moment with Ultraman or Engineer. Save their action/reveal for the movie.

 

[Deck Rickard]

So Brainiac is the secret villain. I'm calling it.

View attachment 115985

Ryan from Screencrush did a breakdown of the trailer yesterday and said the same thing, pointing to a bunch of potential clues in the trailer. I certainly hope so!

But who do we think is playing Brainiac? We know from Gunn’s comment yesterday that there are actors who are in this who haven’t been announced. He mentioned an actress he showed the trailer to, and online speculation is that it was Alcock. That seems logical, but maybe it was someone else.

 

[Lily Adler]

My only issues with the film is the following:

1) Not the story I would tell, but who knows maybe it'll all work. I was surprised by all the JL characters on top of the rumored villain.

2) The collar. The suit is almost pitch perfect for me if it retained a neckline like Chris or Henry.

3) Recycling elements of the Donner verse. I was hoping Gunn would give us a new theme and take Kryptonian tech in a different direction. Instead, we've returned to the crystals and the Williams theme. I like the theme, but was kind of hoping for something unique.

That's pretty much it for now.