All of Snyder’s Films Rumored To Be Erased In The Flash; Cavill Out Also

[Myskin]

I'm not feeling Reeve's Batman at all sadly, so i'm not interested in it one bit but I agree, and I feel it bears to be said : Batman's corner of the DCU (and movies/series) works coherently on itself, very much like the X-Men's part of the Marvel universe do. I'm just sad the more "fantasy" elements of the settings seems to almost never be exploited by creators.

Now that I think about it, Sony is actually doing the same with Spider-man and all of its spin-offs. I'd say that if we had something similar with Superman it would be very akin to the Triangle era, with a Superman franchise and a Steel, or Superboy (the Conner Kent version) franchise and a darker, Eradicator-based series. Maybe a Supergirl one too. It won't happen, of course.

[DochaDocha]

I don't know whether this actually applies - I think that there are more factors at work, even I am not sure which ones. Here in Italy, for example, Harry Potter, Star Wars and the Lord of the Rings were (and still are) huge, Fast & Furious made decent/good money, MCU movies are literally everywhere and DC movies are more or less irrelevant (including the well-received ones, for example Wonder Woman) except for a few exception - Joker went well and - as far as I remember - The Dark Knight too. You should take into account that in addition to US movies there are some non-US national franchises which are popular inside non-US countries and 100% unknown everywhere else. For example, some Italian comedians are very popular and they make one movie per year which - albeit generally of poor quality - a lot of people watch as some kind of annual date. So basically some US movies cannot actually compete with some non-US ones and a lot depends on the date of release. The fact that some franchises were originally shot in English is irrelevant, because in Italy US movies which are released in theaters have been dubbed since the 1920s (it's basically the norm). And I am not even sure that subtitles would be such a huge problem - everyone here has seen Squid Game in its subtitled version and has been hugely popular (they have released a dubbed version too, but it happened after it boomed as a cultural phenomenon).

There are a lot of things at play, of course. A big part seems to be brand recognition. People all around the world will watch a Star Wars movie based on the name alone (I stopped doing that after episode 8, but the point is I kept getting suckered because I bought into the mentality that watching Star Wars at the theatre was just a thing people do).

Two metrics I like to look at involve comparing US domestic box office to total worldwide. The first is dividing international by domestic, and the other is subtracting domestic from worldwide. The latter tells us how popular a movie was overseas. In former kind of tells us if there's something about a movie that makes it specifically popular to US or if it has more of a universal appeal.

Each of the Avengers movies got about a third of their total box office from the US, or 2:1 international to domestic. Compare that to Disney Star Wars where it was closer to 1:1 international to domestic. Black Panther had a higher domestic than international box office. Just from a cursory glance, I'd say Avengers had more of a universal appeal. Black Panther was more interesting to the US than other countries for, let's just say "reasons." Disney's Star Wars did a great job of leveraging Americans' interest in Star Wars, but perhaps the brand doesn't mean as much in other countries.

I think most of those movies listed above fall somewhere on the spectrum from decent to great. Movies that fall short of that include TF 3, 4, and 5, and most of the latter Fast & the Furious Saga. Those do pretty well when you subtract domestic from worldwide totals, but when you take the ratio, you're looking at like 3:1, 4:1, sometimes as high as 5:1. People in the US like them enough for them to gross $200-$300 million domestic, but the international audiences tend to like them a whole lot more relative to US audiences. My hypothesis is that you're just a lot more willing to watch a visually spectacular but dumb film if you never were highly invested in the plot in the first place.


The Dark Knight Rises and Iron Man 3 came out one year apart from one another. Both had name recognition, and the former made a little more money domestic ($448 to $408), but it rounds to 1:1 while the latter rounds to 2:1. The US probably preferred Bruce Wayne over Tony Stark here, but internationally it went the other way, and overall IM3 beat DKR $1.215 B to $1.082 B. This could just be a matter of Marvel's brand recognition is a lot better than Nolan's Batman's outside the US, but I tend to think Nolan's film is a little better written while Marvel's is flashier, and the flash makes up at least some of the difference.

I haven't figured all the factors, of course. Things like access to places like China make a big difference and can skew those two metrics I mentioned.

[Myskin]

cut

I'll tell you what I think based on what I see happening here - of course, I am no expert and I am talking about this just for discussion's sake. Here, some factors which may play a role in the US are not present. Movies are promoted, of course - but no Superbowl, no major promotions, and little to no star power IMHO (with rare exceptions). In my opinion, there are three major factors at work:

1- Release date. I have already described that. The moment when you release a movie strongly influences its reception. Just to give you an idea - some of the most important blockbusters are generally released around Christmas, and they generally have to compete with national, non-US movies/franchises (which generally win the "competition"). Some years ago summer was by far the worst moment to launch a film - basically no one went to the movies in July/August and summertime was the season for B-movies of little to no interest which were screened for a week or little more (this situation has slightly changed in recent years, albeit not that much IMHO).

2- Word of mouth. As said above, marketing exists, but IMHO word of mouth is THE fundamental factor when you are dealing with some movies. MCU, DCEU etc, are mostly films for teenagers here; for them, critics and reviews are basically irrelevant (relatively few people know what Rotten Tomatoes is) and what really counts is the "collective rite", so to speak. When it's Saturday night they go out and they may decide to watch a movie, and such a decision may be based on what they have heard about a flick from friends or other students. One interesting thing is that in some cases a single image may be more influential than many trailers. When the Dark Knight was released, Ledger's scarred face was everywhere - masks, posters, etc. So I have a feeling that many viewers may have been attracted by the Joker rather than the Batman for that specific movie. Which may also explain why Phoenix's Joker was relatively successful here - in that case, I'd say that the ties with the comic book had little to no influence and people (teenagers and adults) were mostly attracted by the thriller/horror elements (most of the people I personally know were actually irritated by the presence of recognizable comic book scenes, the Waynes' murder and such, but maybe it is just a coincidence).

3- Loyalty marketing (I can't find a better word for this, sorry - I hope that I made myself clear). This is by far the most important factor IMHO. Viewers love having habits and routines. It is likely that Iron Man 1 wasn't a huge hit. But once people saw that there were more movies belonging to the same "series", with different characters and themes but more or less the same atmosphere, that those movies could be seen by children and grown-ups alike and they were released every 6 months or less, well, everyone became MCU-addicted. I am not sure how well Dark Knight Rises did here, but if it went worse than Iron Man 3 I'd say that many people didn't perceive Nolan's Batman as an actual "series", with a beginning and an end. Nor as a franchise with recognizable elements, like James Bond (007 is quite successful here as far as I know). This trend - viewers go to the movies knowing what to expect and longing for it - is actually quite common among teenagers and grown-ups as well, and not just franchises. For example, I think that Wes Anderson has a solid base of followers here.

[manwhohaseverything]

Fantasy stories like to handwave away explaining things like how travel from one star system to the next is sort of like driving on some cosmic expressway. A sci-fi story might go into the mechanics of how that's done, be it FTL travel or wormholes. I generally like sci-fi, so I do appreciate it when sci-fi movies and TV take a real problem for us and explain the theory on what would need to be done to overcome the obstacle. I think some good examples of sci-fi in Superman stories include All-Star when Superman used the gravity gun to speed up Luthor's relativistic time and make the serum wear off quicker, and the issue where Superman was able to observe Krypton blow up, something theoretically possible under the right conditions and proper tech.

I think the problem here (and no offense to non-US folks here) is that US audiences tend to be OK with dumb, brainless action films, and non-US audiences may actually prefer watching the action-packed, thinly-written blockbuster over something that's a little heavier in the dialogue. I figure that's part of why Nolan's Batman films only did OK overseas, but Transformers and Vin Diesel's pet franchise were massive hits. So making a brainier Superman film might flop in the box office even if it resonates well with the critics.
.

You don't need to have a character make long drawn out lecture on the intricacies of quantum mechanics.That's bad writing in my opinion.Just reference things,Show how the thing can work even with parameters and constants of physics applied.

US audiences have this wierd dichotomy of dumb action and "brainy complex" stuff..action can be very complex and would have their own problems to tackle.Thrillers,heist,..etc and other things have action.Even comedy requires action and stunts many a times.it's just not blowing things up and in your face.It's barely noticeable.Something i prefer,i hate overly written things.I just want things to seemlessly(more unnoticeable the better) go together inorder for me to hold on to my suspension of disbelief in theatre or wherever.At the end of the day,all that matters is that the show is entertaining at any level.If i am not into the movie i will probably pick it apart.

I would have written that scene differently.the all star scene i mean.I would have had clark test the gun while making it.A forshadowing.Shown how time is relative,then just reference relativity during the third act.It avoids lex having to do big speech.
Edit-on second thought.maybe keep the "impossible defience of entropy" part.Even though that's not really accurate and it's something that religion tries to cling on to.I do like the general notion of "we are all we got" and lex having the buddha moment.

[WonderLight789]

That's a good point.
I honestly don't know what WB is thinking.

WW84, Birds of Prey and The Suicide Squad all flopped at the box office. And yet, Black Canary is getting a leading role in the Batgirl movie and WW is getting a sequel. Think back to 2020. When the Snyder's Justice League was released on HBOMax. Two weeks later WB started promoting the theatrical cut of Justice League 4K blu-ray release. Completely tone deaf to the audience and critic reception to the Snydercut.

It's like they're dead set on make decisions counter to their own success.

I've said this earlier in this thread but I'll say it again.

2021 saw the release of 3 high profile JL type properties. Zack Snyder’s JL, Netflix’s Jupiter’s Legacy and MCU’s Eternals. Eternals flopped and was rotten with critics. Jupiter’s Legacy was rotten with critics and cancelled after 1 season. WB has the GENUINE ARTICLE, positive feedback from fans and critics and they are intent on doing nothing with it. They deserve to lose and fail. Way to take the wrong lesson from 2021.


I wonder what WB will do if the Flash turns in a performance like TSS, WW84 and BOP? Things don't look good.

WW84 was released in the middle of a global lockdown. During the worst part of the pandemic with no vaccine and all. On top of being released on HBOMax at the same time. That movie was never going to be a hit at the BO under those circumstances. It has shown some more legs in physical sales and all. Being 1 best selling blu-ray of 2021 ranking in $33 million in revenue for NA. And doing great numbers in Home entertainment and digital sales in the UK. We'll see how the third movie does.

[Holt]

I think this is about more than just Cavill now. And, to some degree, more than just Snyder. Like manofsteel1979 said, in every medium, from the comics to TV to the movies, they seem to be setting up for his successors to take over. This suggests they are preparing for a day when he won't be Superman anymore. This is an odd route to go if they know they are going to keep him.

TBH that seems more coincidental than anything. Val-Zod (if it even winds up happening) is a thing because Michael B. Jordan is a big name and pushed it as a passion project. We’re gettin Supergirl in the Justice League because the DCEU has been a train wreck since day 1 and they want to move away from Snyder’s divisive movies (and, depending on who you believe, contract negotiations with Cavill falling apart).

I don’t think there’s an actual corporate push to replace Superman, especially when there’s currently a cartoon starring Clark in development.

[Frontier]

TBH that seems more coincidental than anything. Val-Zod (if it even winds up happening) is a thing because Michael B. Jordan is a big name and pushed it as a passion project. We’re gettin Supergirl in the Justice League because the DCEU has been a train wreck since day 1 and they want to move away from Snyder’s divisive movies (and, depending on who you believe, contract negotiations with Cavill falling apart).

I don’t think there’s an actual corporate push to replace Superman, especially when there’s currently a cartoon starring Clark in development.

And he's Superman in a currently popular TV show and will probably still be Superman in forthcoming animated films (including Super Pets).

[DABellWrites]

Snyder fans:
]spider-man-mr-stark.jpg

[DABellWrites]

Part of the reason why I want the next Superman film to be more sci-fi, with emphasis on the "sci," is that there are so many movies about flying bricks punching and shooting bad guys. You need to come in with a real angle on how to make Superman stand out, something much more substantive than "But this time, he's EVIL!" It might seem boring, and maybe a bit slow-paced, but we already tried and largely "failed" (I still stand by my liking for MoS so I'm qualifying "fail" here) by making Superman punch a lot of stuff.

And I'm also of the opinion they should try to dominate animation. I mean, why not?

I want Clark to go back to his social crusader roots. The guy who made a crap ton of quips, who didn't take the bad guy serious. The current Superman is just... Snyder's take was too damn serious. Clark is too much of the law-biding goody two-shoe. Let's remind people of why Clark was the best-selling superhero for decades. Let Siegel Superman be the foundation that'll be built on. Then we can add in the Weisigner mythos. That's just me ideal for Superman

[Myskin]

And he's Superman in a currently popular TV show and will probably still be Superman in forthcoming animated films (including Super Pets).

One thing though. I don't think that a forthcoming Super-Pets movie is actually a proof of the fact that the character is still "healthy" in terms of popularity. If I had to take a bet, I'd say that Super-Pets is actually part of a more general trend with way more ties to "speaking animals" movies (The Secret Life of Pets, for example) rather than superheroes. There's way more Illumination Entertainment than DC Comics in Super-Pets.
Superman and Lois is actually a creatively bizarre object, because it is basically a mix of every pre-existing cinematic/TV versions of the character (including Smallville - the sons - and Injustice, if you take into account the evil Superman from another dimension) with relatively few new elements. And albeit popular enough to get a second season, I am not entirely sure that it is actually going to leave a mark - this is a common problem for several CW shows actually, some days ago I was thinking that even if Smallville lasted for 10 freaking seasons it is relatively forgotten outside the fandom niche. I'd say that no matter how popular they are, these CW shows are actually very "disposable" - more than fans like to think.
However... Yes, there's a forthcoming animated TV series. A lot depends on the creative forces involved (which we don't know much about) and the direction they are taking, but if I had to place a bet, I'd say that the animated series will be way more important in terms of relaunching/redesigning the character than any other adaptation/TV series. Actually, it is the ONLY non-derivative version of the character someone is working on right now.
So yes, I wouldn't say that WB has completely lost faith in the character in terms of adaptations (the comic books are a lost cause though). However, I am not entirely sure of what they are trying to achieve with all these characters inspired by the original one but who are clearly, 100% derivative - I mean, historically derivative characters never proved to be successful as far as I remember (Popeye and Son, Sherlock Holmes in the 22nd century, Phantom 2040)

[Vordan]

So yes, I wouldn't say that WB has completely lost faith in the character in terms of adaptations (the comic books are a lost cause though). However, I am not entirely sure of what they are trying to achieve with all these characters inspired by the original one but who are clearly, 100% derivative - I mean, historically derivative characters never proved to be successful as far as I remember (Popeye and Son, Sherlock Holmes in the 22nd century, Phantom 2040)

I’m assuming you mean that in terms of “having good comics won’t do anything for Superman’s image” which I agree with.

In terms of why they’re doing spin-offs? Well that’s because WB believes that they can increase Superman’s profitability by changing who is Superman. Jon let’s you have a greater degree of freedom because he’s not Clark. You can’t say he hasto act a certain way or that he only fits into one tone so to speak. Plus he’s bi and that gets you Twitter points for representation, same with Val, or Kenan, or Kara, or whoever. In this era’s focus on representing, which BP showed can be quite profitable, I get why they’re doing this. They’re hoping to increase their returns, especially since doing a “traditional” take in their eyes with Routh and Cavill failed.

[Myskin]

I’m assuming you mean that in terms of “having good comics won’t do anything for Superman’s image” which I agree with.

What I meant is that current Superman comics may even be written by talented writers but are not particularly important/popular (I really don't think that PKJ will actually leave a mark after he is gone), or they are focused on 100% derivative characters like Jon, or they are simply not that good.
It's not that I think that comic books couldn't do anything AT ALL to relaunch Superman - I mean, superhero books are dying but mangas are insanely popular, and mangas are just comic books written with a different approach, also some popular mangas are 100% superhero-based - but in order to do that you would need Frank Miller/Bill Sienkiewicz levels of experimentation, which is not something DC (or Marvel, for that matter) is going for right now.

In terms of why they’re doing spin-offs? Well that’s because WB believes that they can increase Superman’s profitability by changing who is Superman. Jon let’s you have a greater degree of freedom because he’s not Clark. You can’t say he hasto act a certain way or that he only fits into one tone so to speak. Plus he’s bi and that gets you Twitter points for representation, same with Val, or Kenan, or Kara, or whoever. In this era’s focus on representing, which BP showed can be quite profitable, I get why they’re doing this. They’re hoping to increase their returns, especially since doing a “traditional” take in their eyes with Routh and Cavill failed.

I don't know whether this is actually the case, because all in all (occasional moments aside), these comic books are bought by the same old 35/40-year-old farts who have bought DC series for 20 years by now. It's not that SuperJon is really attracting young readers - I mean, it sells more than other other superhero books, but that's because superhero sales are abysmal in general. IMHO in that case they are just milking the longtime fans with some vague manga-based influences (some moments/images from Son of Kal-El are clearly inspired by yaoi mangas), but the mythology that series revolves around is at least 20 years old.

[Vordan]

What I meant is that current Superman comics may even be written by talented writers but are not particularly important/popular (I really don't think that PKJ will actually leave a mark after he is gone), or they are focused on 100% derivative characters like Jon, or they are simply not that good.
It's not that I think that comic books couldn't do anything AT ALL to relaunch Superman - I mean, superhero books are dying but mangas are insanely popular, and mangas are just comic books written with a different approach, also some popular mangas are 100% superhero-based - but in order to do that you would need Frank Miller/Bill Sienkiewicz levels of experimentation, which is not something DC (or Marvel, for that matter) is going for right now.

Who has? Tomasi and Jurgens had 45 issues each on the main books and basically nothing of their era aside from Jon has stuck around. Morrison’s reboot got kicked to the curb as well. Everything from the New 52 era for Supes has more or less been wiped clean. But you know what? That’s the norm. Slott was on ASM for something like 10 years and yet barely anything from his era has lasted. King wrote 85 issues of Batman and barely anything from his run carried forward, even the BatCat relationship he put so much focus on has been sort of dissolved. Al Ewing wrote 50 issues of Hulk that completely revamped the character on par with what Alan Moore did to Swamp Thing. Cates took over afterwards and has basically tossed all of that out and reset Hulk “back to basics”. One major exception has been Hickman’s revamp of the X-Men, that seems to be carrying on after him, but his legendary Avengers and F4 runs did not get the same courtesy. Other major exception has been the Bendis Superman run, because of his aging up of Jon and rebooting the Legion which do seem set to stick.

PKJ’s run will have a lasting impact if it gets adapted, he’s at the very least providing material for Mongul as a villain that could make for awesome animated or video game adaptions. Will that happen? I don’t know. I certainly hope so but I’m not reading Action out of hopes it’s going to CHANGE EVERYTHING FOREVERRRRRR because the odds of that happening are infinitesimal. I’m reading it because it’s a genuinely good Superman run and I like Superman.

I don't know whether this is actually the case, because all in all (occasional moments aside), these comic books are bought by the same old 35/40-year-old farts who have bought DC series for 20 years by now. It's not that SuperJon is really attracting young readers - I mean, it sells more than other other superhero books, but that's because superhero sales are abysmal in general. IMHO in that case they are just milking the longtime fans with some vague manga-based influences (some moments/images from Son of Kal-El are clearly inspired by yaoi mangas), but the mythology that series revolves around is at least 20 years old.

Comics are just a way to test run ideas for adaption into movies and other media as well as preserve trademarks for these companies. Doesn’t matter how well or poorly they sell. Val-Zod was in a garbage series with E2, he’s a flat bland character that didn’t sell all that well, yet he’s getting an HBO Max series because MBJ wants to play Superman. Bendis’ LoSH reboot went over like a lead balloon, it sold poorly and the hardcore Legion fans hated it. Doesn’t matter because Bendis is getting to write an HBO MAX animated series that draws on his run despite poor sales. Maybe one day there will be a superstar Asian actor and I’ll get my Kenan HBO Max series because they want to play Superman too. Jon as Superman is just providing a foundation of stories that can be adapted. Both i and others have theorized that Jon will be the next DCEU Superman in the “main” universe after Sasha Supergirl is done, taking over for her the way she took over for Cavill.

[Myskin]

Who has? Tomasi and Jurgens had 45 issues each on the main books and basically nothing of their era aside from Jon has stuck around. Morrison’s reboot got kicked to the curb as well. Everything from the New 52 era for Supes has more or less been wiped clean. But you know what? That’s the norm. Slott was on ASM for something like 10 years and yet barely anything from his era has lasted. King wrote 85 issues of Batman and barely anything from his run carried forward, even the BatCat relationship he put so much focus on has been sort of dissolved. Al Ewing wrote 50 issues of Hulk that completely revamped the character on par with what Alan Moore did to Swamp Thing. Cates took over afterwards and has basically tossed all of that out and reset Hulk “back to basics”. One major exception has been Hickman’s revamp of the X-Men, that seems to be carrying on after him, but his legendary Avengers and F4 runs did not get the same courtesy. Other major exception has been the Bendis Superman run, because of his aging up of Jon and rebooting the Legion which do seem set to stick.

PKJ’s run will have a lasting impact if it gets adapted, he’s at the very least providing material for Mongul as a villain that could make for awesome animated or video game adaptions. Will that happen? I don’t know. I certainly hope so but I’m not reading Action out of hopes it’s going to CHANGE EVERYTHING FOREVERRRRRR because the odds of that happening are infinitesimal. I’m reading it because it’s a genuinely good Superman run and I like Superman.

Don't take offence - but your perspective is a bit biased because you are a longtime Superman reader who is not planning to stop reading Superman anytime soon. Basically you are part of the specific target audience stuff like Son of Kal-El or World of Krypton is aimed at - the longtime readers DC is milking and whose numbers are decreasing day by day. It's not that there's anything inherently wrong with that, but this approach is more or less what is killing superhero books right now. It's not that I want everything to change every two issues or something like that - the problem is that when I still read this stuff on a regular basis I constantly expected a REAL relaunch of the character which - as a matter of fact - never came. The only real relaunch with some influence on the character I can think of dates back to Byrne. Hoping in a relaunch of the character and keeping this approach alive is a contradiction in terms. You are right when you say that nothing matters or counts anymore, but that is actually part of the problem. The entire superhero format should be entirely rethought, and they are not doing it anytime soon. There's stuff like Watchmen which was released almost 40 years ago and they are still milking, whereas New52 has been completely forgotten (obviously).

Comics are just a way to test run ideas for adaption into movies and other media as well as preserve trademarks for these companies.

Sure.

[Vordan]

Don't take offence - but your perspective is a bit biased because you are a longtime Superman reader who is not planning to stop reading Superman anytime soon. Basically you are part of the specific target audience stuff like Son of Kal-El or World of Krypton is aimed at - the longtime readers DC is milking and whose numbers are decreasing day by day. It's not that there's anything inherently wrong with that, but this approach is more or less what is killing superhero books right now. It's not that I want everything to change every two issues or something like that - the problem is that when I still read this stuff on a regular basis I constantly expected a REAL relaunch of the character which - as a matter of fact - never came. The only real relaunch with some influence on the character I can think of dates back to Byrne. Hoping in a relaunch of the character and keeping this approach alive is a contradiction in terms. You are right when you say that nothing matters or counts anymore, but that is actually part of the problem. The entire superhero format should be entirely rethought, and they are not doing it anytime soon. There's stuff like Watchmen which was released almost 40 years ago and they are still milking, whereas New52 has been completely forgotten (obviously).

Comics will never be what they were but they seem to be doing fine for now. I dunno man I’m not really sure what you’re looking for from the medium. These days what really “relaunches” characters is outside media. Harley Quinn experienced a resurgence in popularity because of the Arkham games, Batman began utterly lapping the rest of DC because the 2000s were a Golden Age of Batman content, Hal Jordan and the GL mythos has fallen back into a slump because the GL movie flopped, WW is getting more attention and focus because her movie was a success, she’s getting a video game before Superman because of that, the Flash skyrocketed in popularity because of the CW show, and Invincible has experienced another resurgence in popularity because of the animated cartoon. A successful “relaunch” for Superman pretty much has to come outside of comics, and even then it will take multiple successes. The CW show is a nice start but I agree it can’t permanently change views on him alone. A good CW show + MAWS being good + Bendis LoSH show being good + a Superman movie/video game coming out and being good? That would help revive the character.