Originally Posted by
People Of The Earth
Heh, DC was aligning his three biggest characters in BvS, three pop culture icon known worldwide, two of them who had been starring in their own movies only a few years before, one of them straight out of a successful billions++ trilogy of films...
Of course BvS was going to make money for its studio, that was never in question, no matter how people slice it today.
However, we all know it didn't make as much money as it should have been doing, all because of how mediocre the movie in itself actually is.
A movie this big shouldn't have been mediocre or okay-ish at all - GOOD to EXCELLENT should have been the general consensus around it.
Instead, the majority of people who've seen it are navigating in mediocre - okay-ish waters when it comes to it.
How is that satisfying for DC and WB ?
Of course it's not.
Studios only care about the money they make, and it's obvious money was left on the table with this movie. Right now, it litterally is making money despite being so flawed it was universally panned for it: can't get more frustrating to know a GOOD movie would have reached who knows what numbers for WB...
Especially when your direct concurrence just managed to do it (Deadpool/Fox), or seems to be taking that road (CW/Marvel) right before or after your own movie.
Yes, Marvel made less money with Thor, Captain America, or Iron Man or Ant-Man.
So what ? Since when Batman and Superman shouldn't make more money than the three of them, or Ant-man ?
Thor, Captain America or Iron Man were nowhere near the level of public recognition and appeal when their movies came out than BATMAN and SUPERMAN. None of them were pop culture icons like those and WONDER WOMAN either.
Let alone Ant-Man...
They had a launching pad way steeper than the Trinity had here, yet they still made a lot of money, and their movies were well received by moviegoers and critics.
Because of how entertaining and generally good they were.
Which is all that matters to someone who just paid her/his ticket for a movie: whether or not the movie will deliver and actually be GOOD.
At the end of the day, a bad movie is still a bad movie, all the money in the world won't change that.
F4ntastic could have cracked a billion, this movie would still be a massive disappointement, plagued as it was.
Of course BvS is not F4ntastic level of bad, or Green Lantern level of bad, but it's not what I would call a good movie either: I personnally took issue with the pacing of the movie and its general structure, some jarring creative decisions regarding the characters' adaptations and some of the acting performances that were honestly underwhelming.
All this threw this movie off and that's why it sits between mediocre and okay-ish for a lot of people, me included: it should have been so much more. Overall, it disappointed me. I knew the moment I stepped out from the theater there was no way I was going to go see it again. Some of my friends felt actually cheated once out !
And at some point, studios can't serve subpar movies to the audience and expect said audience to come back afterward. Which is the goal here for them, after all. Get the audience to come back to see the next movie, so they can snatch those €/$/£ again and keep the ball rolling...
A lot of people are from the "fool me once..." category, so neglecting quality or, at the very least, entertainement, is not really an option when investing this much money in a project.
Brushing people pointing that out as a doomy and gloomy crowd, or as a bunch of haters, unappreciative of Snyder's talent as I've seen way too many times since this movie came out, is not really compelling.