James Gunn Celebrates ‘Superman’s Box Office Win: “I’m Incredibly Grateful For Your Enthusiasm”
-
Did they really have to have the good guys go Pinochet on the bad guy at the end of the film?
Kind of disturbing.
It was a Disney villain death. Nothing more. It was a dark moment, but was there to highlight the difference between the naive Superman and the more cynical Heroes. Superman would have dragged him to the Hague, but does Hawkgirl even know about that? I would like to see something like that going forward in the series, but it makes sense now.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DisneyVillainDeath
-
I was curious about how the Minecraft movie adapted the voxel world, but I started watching it and pretty quickly turned it off.
Superhero movies are OK, I like the Batman series, but otherwise I am good watching one movie a decade (with some exceptions).
To me, a lot of the motifs are extremely provincial and lazy. I remember watching the first Iron Man in 2008, there was this scene where Downey Jr. is imprisoned in a cave by the Taliban and he builds the iron man costume out of spare parts or something and escapes.
It was so stupid. Especially considering in real life an American oligarch in such a situation would do everything to not rock the the boat and exploit his American citizenship and financial status to get released (either via an exchange or giving the Taliban lots of money).
It was so stupid. Especially considering in real life an American oligarch in such a situation would do everything to not rock the the boat and exploit his American citizenship and financial status to get released (either via an exchange or giving the Taliban lots of money).
It's a super hero movie. Tony Stark is an idealized futurist. You're oligarchs in the franchise are Justin Hammer or Obadiah Stane.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
Got back from it earlier today. Loved it.
Plot holes you can drive a bus through but I don't care, it was bright, fun and funny.
I don't need dark and brooding - I want escapism fun. Best movie Superman since Christopher Reeves.
-
It was so stupid. Especially considering in real life an American oligarch in such a situation would do everything to not rock the the boat and exploit his American citizenship and financial status to get released (either via an exchange or giving the Taliban lots of money).
It's a super hero movie. Tony Stark is an idealized futurist. You're oligarchs in the franchise are Justin Hammer or Obadiah Stane.
That's fair. I am just sharing my perspective. Keep in mind this was in 2008, when it just got released in cinemas and that was my initial gut-feeling reaction. Not sure who the other fellows are, but in my mind the Stark character was clearly an American oligarch.
As I mentioned in my OP, for me positioning Minecraft's popularity as being bad for the movie industry, while at the same time presenting Superman as a contribution to cinema seems a bit inconsistent.
-
That's fair. I am just sharing my perspective. Keep in mind this was in 2008, when it just got released in cinemas and that was my initial gut-feeling reaction. Not sure who the other fellows are, but in my mind the Stark character was clearly an American oligarch.
As I mentioned in my OP, for me positioning Minecraft's popularity as being bad for the movie industry, while at the same time presenting Superman as a contribution to cinema seems a bit inconsistent.
Stane was the main villain of IM1. Hammer was one of the villains of IM2. Stark was an oligarch, but that's part of his character arc. He wasn't a good person in the beginning. That's the point.
As far as Minecraft and other popcorn flicks being bad for the industry, those types of movies have always existed.
-
I was curious about how the Minecraft movie adapted the voxel world, but I started watching it and pretty quickly turned it off.
Superhero movies are OK, I like the Batman series, but otherwise I am good watching one movie a decade (with some exceptions).
To me, a lot of the motifs are extremely provincial and lazy. I remember watching the first Iron Man in 2008, there was this scene where Downey Jr. is imprisoned in a cave by the Taliban and he builds the iron man costume out of spare parts or something and escapes.
It was so stupid. Especially considering in real life an American oligarch in such a situation would do everything to not rock the the boat and exploit his American citizenship and financial status to get released (either via an exchange or giving the Taliban lots of money).
wrote last edited by [email protected]I dont like hero movies mostly because they tend to romanticize a very juvenile view of the world, and it makes it hard to suspend belief when none of the adults act in any sort of rational way.
I do love batman though since you mentioned it, but the universe really. Gotham the tv show was fantastic, I loved the video game trilogy, and I can't think of a batman movie I haven't liked. Thats a universe where people very much act like you would expect them to given the circumstances.
-
Got back from it earlier today. Loved it.
Plot holes you can drive a bus through but I don't care, it was bright, fun and funny.
I don't need dark and brooding - I want escapism fun. Best movie Superman since Christopher Reeves.
fun movies need to be fun. time and time again we have learned to accept giant potholes as long as the ride is fun.
no one complained that the Trex came out of no where at the end of Jurassic park, but we were all glad it did.
this movie hits the right levels of wierd and goofy while still being fun.
did lex luthor steal the plan from Vought?
-
That ain't justice dude. So much for "truth, justice, and the American way." That's just normalizing the tactics of fascists. If he's a fuckin war criminal send him to the fucking Hague for trial.
isn't killing heads of state willy nilly the American way?
-
That ain't justice dude. So much for "truth, justice, and the American way." That's just normalizing the tactics of fascists. If he's a fuckin war criminal send him to the fucking Hague for trial.
Can't wait till setanyahu gets the same treatment.
-
I think this is one of the few cases where the studio does care more about the critical and especially fan reception than the box office returns. They are trying to relaunch their whole franchise and this is one of the cornerstones.
Also $1b is just way off considering not a single superman movie has ever achieved it based on this source.
Naw man, studios only care about money.
-
DC Studios will introduce the films Supergirl
That would be great if Gunn directs again!
"Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow" is the source material for the Supergirl movie.
It's dark and gritty as hell. Not Gunn's strength.
-
Naw man, studios only care about money.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Apart from billionaire pet projects like Laika that might be true, but this seems a bit too reductionist. There are many ways to go about it and the difference matters. Unless you want to tell me the the whole media industry from Netflix to A24 does the exact same thing.
-
Apart from billionaire pet projects like Laika that might be true, but this seems a bit too reductionist. There are many ways to go about it and the difference matters. Unless you want to tell me the the whole media industry from Netflix to A24 does the exact same thing.
I am not following your thinking.
The pet projects are the ones done for passion and other reasons.
Netflix, A24 and Disney, release movies and TV shows for one reason, to make money.
-
I am not following your thinking.
The pet projects are the ones done for passion and other reasons.
Netflix, A24 and Disney, release movies and TV shows for one reason, to make money.
My line of thought is that yes the end goal is shareholder value/money, but the method varies. You can go for quality or quantity, or for long vs short term profits. And those steps in-between matter.
In this case with WB and Superman the amount of money an occasional Superman movie can make is not enough, they want that sweet franchise model. But you can't just will that into place, as they've demonstrated with their failure to do so so far.
There has to be some substance at the start before you can roll out even lesser IP and make bank like marvel. Which is why in this instance they probably don't care as much about the profit from this movie, but try to optimize it more for audience and critic appeal.
-
My line of thought is that yes the end goal is shareholder value/money, but the method varies. You can go for quality or quantity, or for long vs short term profits. And those steps in-between matter.
In this case with WB and Superman the amount of money an occasional Superman movie can make is not enough, they want that sweet franchise model. But you can't just will that into place, as they've demonstrated with their failure to do so so far.
There has to be some substance at the start before you can roll out even lesser IP and make bank like marvel. Which is why in this instance they probably don't care as much about the profit from this movie, but try to optimize it more for audience and critic appeal.
Right, make it now or make it later.
-
Right, make it now or make it later.
Exactly. And also i think it's hard to see those superhero movies aimed at establishing a franchise as something standalone.
[...] Superman is just the first step,” he added. “Over the next year alone, DC Studios will introduce the films Supergirl and Clayface in theaters and the series Lanterns on HBO Max, all part of a bold ten-year plan.
This excerpt from the article really says it all.
