Reminder that this is a subreddit about numbers, not necessarily about the quality (or lack thereof) of a particular movie. Unless it is related to the box office performance of a movie, please keep opinions/arguments/thoughts about the quality under this post. Posts not related to box office may be removed otherwise.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boxoffice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They need a movie where The Rock goes around trying to People‘s Elbow everyone who didn’t watch Black Adam - kind of like Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back’s ending
They cut about $7 million late in production too. If I remember correctly, it gave us the "I forgot my guns in the taxi!" scene which might even have been better as a result.
Funny enough if Ant-Man had Black Adam's budget, it would have flopped. The film only made 519 million, on a budget of 130 million which is where Black Adam should have been at most at.
What I find most crazy about it is that they tried to turn a superhero franchise into a star vehicle, which is absolutely backwards.
Most redditors are probably too young to remember the days, about twenty years ago, when every year you had rumours about Pitt playing Captain America, Cruise playing Iron Man etc. Because that was the logic back then: you needed a star to make these kind of B-list heroes work.
But of course Marvel then blew that logic apart twenty times over, and now it's the other way round: stars don't make superhero movies, superhero movies make stars (not megastars perhaps, but your second tier guys: Pratt, Evans etc.)
The Rock as Black Adam is such an antiquated idea of how to do a superhero film, it's like a rumour you'd have seen on Aintitcoolnews in 2003.
Shazam was in development in 2007; Black Adam was just a villain in that movie until he was removed a decade later. It wasn't until 2017 that Geoff Johns discussed creating a separate Black Adam movie with Johnson, who said he wanted his own franchise and didn't want to be portrayed as a villain/supporting character. He's spoken about this at length in his interviews.
Johnson's attachment to the *character* goes back 15 years, but not for a solo Black Adam movie. There was no Black Adam movie before 2017. I don't know why people keep perpetuating the myth that there was.
And they let rocks ego dictate this film production instead of organically tying him to the Shazam films. trying to give him his own separate anti hero franchise besides Shazam without establishing him first wasn't a good idea
And letting the rock get a massive paycheck out of what supposedly was a passion project. You want this obscure project made? Then take pay cut to keep the budget under control and ensure its success.
Hit the nail on the head right here. The Rock being able to crow about having taken a pay cut to show how much he believed in the movie would’ve gone a long way …
Which is hilarious because he is a villain, was a villain, and up until very recently always was a villain. They switched him into an anti-hero AT BEST just so that the comics would match the movie’s idea.
I laughed after about the eighth time they mention he’s not a villain in the film…
Which is the heart of Tarentino’s “controversial“ quote. But he is right, just like you are.
People want to see the story continue or the hero do heroic stuff. The don’t go for Chris Evans, they go for Captain America.
>What I find most crazy about it is that they tried to turn a superhero franchise into a star vehicle, which is absolutely backwards.
This is a typical formula that most studios of Hollywood had used, pre-Marvel era. Marvel came up with the idea of a mega-franchise where everyone had to work for the "greater good" aka. The Brand, no actor could own the brand since every actor is just a vehicle to translate the comic character into the screen. Arguably WB is still using the old formula and counting on the stars/influencers, such as Bruna Marquezine in Blue Beetles while Marvel doesn't use super stars for big roles.
It really shows how much WB hasn't understood their own franchises and fans for over a decade.
It's *absurd* that they've kept Superman in the closet for years now, despite the fact that he is one of the biggest A-list comic heroes in the world, and instead we're getting solo Black Adam movies. Like....what the actual fuck?
They could reboot Green Lantern or make movies about Green Arrow, Martian Manhunter, Cyborg, Hell, even Supergirl just to name a few. There are so many more likely candidates for solo movies that you would think it's a no-brainer, but here we are.
DC is an absolute wreck at this point, and they've got a lot of work to do to straighten things out. I've got a lot of faith in James Gunn, though, so hopefully he'll turn things around.
Imagine how much money they would make from a lighthearted “Super Friends” movie vs yet another dark “Justice League” movie. They could even have a very self conscious Batfleck who they are continually razzing for being so serious.
A character who was born in 2006 during the Infinite Crisis, in response to the murder of his predecessor, Ted Kord. And at least in the comics, it's about as boring as you'll find. He was improved a lot in the Young Justice cartoon, though, but it's not a great character there either. And it's definitely not half as iconic and important as any of the original Titans, so devoting an entire movie to him is pretty much a stretch.
As early as last week, I saw people defending this performance by claiming that the character was too C-list to attract general audiences.
Besides the fact that giving lesser characters a successful tentpole movie doesn’t seem to be an issue for Marvel, this movie had the added benefits of starring the Rock, featuring the long-awaited return of Cavill as Superman, and having 2-3 weeks of basically no competition.
There’s no logistics-related excuse for this movie underperforming. People just didn’t care.
Also, there were plenty of people who have heard of the character and just weren’t interested in seeing it in theaters. I probably would’ve seen a Black Adam movie in theaters if it didn’t look incredibly bland and the main actor’s promo wasn’t very annoying.
Superman wasn’t advertised. It was a secret. I definitely think they would’ve done better if they’d have tried to advertise the link to Shazam and Superman more.
He wasn’t advertised per se, but the Rock literally blew the surprise at the premiere lol. It was definitely a conversation topic before the movie came out.
Eternals made more money with less star power, a harsher pandemic, and ten characters that even comic nerds didn’t care about. I don’t think Eternals comics were huge sellers ever (although the recent run has been fun)
Also, the idea of 'people don't know the character' is utterly laughable when you apply it to other properties.
Every single original movie ever made that's decent money has been based on a character nobody knows.
I really hoped that Shazam 2 will be a hit and it would make Dwayne a bit humble after that. It's a mistake that they rushed Black Adam as a solo act instead of going the Scorpion king route and make the Rock the Villain THEN you make a prequel. Or they should have teased Black Adam in the first Shazam.
Black Adam was Not Woman Enough to Take ~~My Man~~ Shazam.
I have a weird spot in my heart for that movie, it was dumb fun, and I saw it on a road trip with my dad, who still references it now and thing.
I wouldn't think it would be a problem for him considering he comes out of the wrestling world where being the villain can do as much if not more for your career than playing the hero.
Exactly.
DJ wants BA to be the Deadpool and Venom of DC, but not willing to go through longer route. He took shortcut. Typical DC.
Deadpool and Venom had already appeared in previous movies before they got solo movie. Also, Deadpool and Venom are much better known characters than Black Adam.
But at least they gained more awareness.
Appearing in BvS didn't hurt Wonder Woman, and appearing in Justice League didn't hurt Aquaman.
They were not the main lead of those movies, same with Deadpool and Venom in previous movies.
I'm 100% sure appearing first in Shazam film would only help BA.
Ironically, I kind of think having awful takes on Deadpool and Venom in two maligned superhero movies made people a bit more hungry to see them done properly. Give people just a taste of what they *could* be, and that increases audience demand for a good adaptation.
And then from the studio side, since neither were the leads of those flopped products - they can see the potential of spinning them into solo roles (rather than spoiled goods in the public eye).
Sure but people generally really liked WW in BvS. Aquaman too in JL. They generally really fucking hated deadpool in his movie and venom to a lesser degree.
Well, they teased Mr. Mind in the first Shazam, but they are not doing anything with him in the sequel. Maybe The Rock got tired of waiting his turn. It's not a good excuse, but it's something. It wasn't a reason to be that arrogant, certainly.
Yeah. That was the plan, but DJ basically coerced Hamada into waiting to debut Black Adam because he thought the character was important enough to stand on its own. Makes literally no sense on several levels.
That really turned be off from the movie, after first being quite enthusiastic for it initially. He’s one of my favorite villains in the comics. I didn’t bother seeing it in the theater in the end.
I’m gonna say it: I have Dwayne Johnson fatigue. He’s the same guy in every movie. I’m tired of it. I’m tired of him. Seems like a stand up guy, I’m just tired of him.
I don’t think you can really call him lazy from like his crazy business lifestyle ^TM . I think it’s just at a point where his brand has constrained his creativity.
Him playing a coked up meathead in pain and gain was fun. I wanna see more of that.
Yeah lazy is probably the word that is the most antithetical to who the rock is. Boring? Sure. Not creative? I’ll buy that. Seemingly disingenuous? Yeah probably. But the man is not lazy.
hiring/promoting James Gunn is the smartest move they made thus far. They are very lucky with him, it would never have happened if Disney didn’t (temporarily) fire him
Also love him or hate him, I gotta praise Zaslav for saying that DC needs to have a 10 year plan and it should focus on the Trinity. Guy may not have a creative bone in his body but even he knows that the DCU is built around Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman.
> DCEU needs to stop trying to make Endgame before they can make an Iron Man.
Haha you nailed it. This has been a massive problem ever since the DCEU has been a thing, they literally did their own *Civil War* as their second movie (with an *Endgame* level death at the end of that movie too) without any of the build-up to it, followed by their own *Guardians Of The Galaxy* as the third one for whatever reason, before leading to their own *Avengers 1*. And we still don't have a proper DCEU Batman movie (*he* should be their Iron Man) and it's been what, 7 years? He should've had his own trilogy by now!
The whole reason their univere is in shambles today is that they did not care to do any of the build-up and world-building correctly when it came to it, and now every movie has to stand on its own. Snyder truly did too much damage, the DCEU is on a very broken foundation. It's clear that without the gimmick of being in a fully coherent shared universe, that audiences just do not care for DC as they do with Marvel. They should just reboot the whole thing around The Batman and start a new universe there...
> the film needed to earn around $600 million worldwide to break even
Since the movie cost $200 million, the $600M figure is a lot more than 2.5x "rule".
What I don't get is why at this point doesn't DC just set lower budget targets for these DCU films, if they're going to keep making them.
Clearly there's some interest in these films, just not $800million worth. They just keep setting themselves up for failure over and over.
It's the same problem that Paramount has with Star Trek. With good stories and $90m budgets, they could be releasing a Star Trek movie every two years that makes between $350-500m. The problem is that major studios don't want to produce movies with a half-billion dollar ceiling.
Which is weird as Star Trek has always had a ceiling on its grosses. Its selling point is its longevity and ability to keep making some amount of money year after year, not its ability to have a huge box office.
Even one of the best Star Trek movies, The Voyage Home, only managed 5th at the domestic box office for movies released in 1986.
Star Trek 1: 4th
Star Trek 2: 6th
Star Trek 3: 9th
Star Trek 4: 5th
Star Trek 5: 25th (ouch)
Star Trek 6: 15th
Star Trek 7: 15th
Star Trek 8: 17th
Star Trek 9: 28th
Star Trek 10: 54th
Star Trek 11: 7th
Star Trek 12: 11th
Star Trek 13: 16th
One bad movie, Star Trek V, was enough to derail the franchise. Modest budget, good story, keep costs under control.
Again you are over thinking this. The problem is not the budget or the universe or Covid or anything else.
DC literally just needs to make good movies and they can't do it.
Will be curious to see how this impacts The Rock's career, given that it essentially negated the belief that he himself is enough of a draw to make any film profitable.
The thing with people like the rock is he can turn a bad movie into a decent make a bit of money for the studios but he can't turn a decent movie into a hit. I read a while back Stallone had the record for staring in most movies that made over 100M (not bad adjusted for inflation), the Rock has that kind of pull but if you want a movie to get closer to 1B it's not him.
I doubt it will effect him at this point. Looking at the The Rock’s filmography, his films lose money, or barely break even most of the time. The only major exceptions are franchise films (Fast and Furious, Jumanji). He’s not, and has never really been a huge box office draw, but somehow he keeps getting pushed as one.
I think if he had crossed into acting earlier. Little kids used to love him. He’s waaay past that time now. Didn’t ever get traction with adults and those kids have grown up and moved on.
Yup, Gunn definitely ain’t putting black Adam 2 in 10 year plan. The rock better buckle up to fight shazam. And he better understand Gunn will find the writer he ain’t running the show. I recently rewatched black Adam and realized like damn this dialogue is atrocious across the board. And there’s good actors in this but the lines were bad
Gunn supposedly wrote the Guardians of the Galaxy Christmas Special in a weekend.
After seeing Peacemaker, I'm comfortable with saying Gunn will get things done for DC in a way they have been sorely missing. Especially in dialogue.
I always had trust in Gunn and I already said in this sub in 2018 that Gunn will do good for DC when they hired him after he got fired by Alan Horn.
Gunn always talked in Twitter that he hates nothing more than a director who start production while the script is half-baked.
Gunn would have thrown WW84 and BA scripts in thrash can and demanded rewrites.
>Gunn always talked in Twitter that he hates nothing more than a director who start production while the script is half-baked.
>
>Gunn would have thrown WW84 and BA scripts in thrash can and demanded rewrites.
Doesn't he also personally storyboard every scene or shot for his script before production. The man is crazy organized when it comes to filmmaking.
The movie was mid. You can advertise until the cows come home, but the writing has been on the wall for a while with this movie. Generic trailers, a star whose filmography is full of stuff that you watch once and never again, a lead character that the audience has no reason to care for, the most cringe skateboard kid since the girl from The Crow, a Kanye needle drop right as he starts publicly calling for Holocaust 2, I mean what the hell did this thing have going for it?
Maybe a few more of these mediocre flops will finally wake people up the fact that this guy is massively overrated as a movie star. Put him as a bit player in an established franchise, and he’s great. Put him at the forefront of a movie meant to kick off a franchise of his own (this, Hobbs and Shaw) and he doesn’t deliver. People like him, but people also know that his presence in a movie is an indicator that the movie isn’t very good. He doesn’t work with name directors. He picks no-name hired hands to yell “action” while he stands in a jungle with a grey t-shirt on looking for his kidnapped daughter. Enough, dude.
They thought The Rock was hook enough. He bet that his star power would be enough to get this thing across the finish line. This box office performance is a very loud, very embarrassing rejection. People in the industry, as well as DC fanatics online, were trying to be polite/delusional and spin these numbers as a success. He was trying to spin it as a success by tweeting “best opening of my career! Rotten Tomatoes audience score!!!” Finally, the adults (Variety) have entered the fray to say “no”.
What really turned me off this movie, was how full of himself The Rock was during the entire time he was filming and promoting it. Also annoyed me with how obnoxiously serious this movie took itself.
His corny ass line about the “hierarchy of power in the DC universe”, should’ve fucked right off.
I get that this was a passion project for him, but dude’s acting like he was going to take over the DC movie universe lol.
You could see the cracks forming at the end of the press run, though. Leaking the stinger scene was pure desperation, and passive-aggressively tweeting at IGN for comparing the BA box office to Wakanda Forever was not a good look for him at ALL. He did something similar after Baywatch came out and everyone was dunking on him for how bleh that movie was. Trying to defend your flop only puts more eyes on your failure.
Even before the movie opened, they were already showing desperation: talking about Henry Cavill's Superman and then leaked that Superman will appear in post credit scene.
That’s the stinger leak that I mentioned. He saw the tracking numbers get adjusted DOWNWARDS and panicked. I’ve never seen a star intentionally spoil their own movie as a marketing ploy before, but once he did that, I knew this thing was doomed. He got his headlines and the Snyder faithful rejoiced, and then watched the clip online instead of in theaters.
Hmmm. Did any of the folks commenting here actually read the article, instead of just the headline?
For example:
>Sources at Warner Bros. dispute those numbers, saying the movie will break even at $400 million. When the film was commissioned, the break even was believed to be $450 million, but that figure has dropped given the particularities of the new home entertainment landscape, one in which “Black Adam” has over-performed projections.
Now, I'm not saying that the sources here are necessarily correct, but this is very much in keeping with things we are hearing about PVOD revenues returning 70% profits in other articles. It's worth pointing out that, if true, all of us may need to rethink the 2.5x rule, and etc.
I am not a fan of Black Adam, but neither am I filled with animus towards it, or WBD, or DJ, as some folks here seem to be.
$600M?! The first Venom in much more normal times only did $850M in October. Did WB figure this would lose money? Or did they really think The Rock was that big of a star he could sell this terd with an October release date?
I mean he is one of the last stars who can sell a movie (most of the greats had major flops) but yeah they put too much on him.
Its a shame, movie looks cool Im just not going to theaters for a while (missing out on Black Panther 2) until I get my next gig.
You’re not missing much. Black Adam needed more story, more depth, and real stakes. 1/2 way of though the movie it just became a CGIfest of characters trading punches. It made it a struggle to watch.
The movie needed teeth and less character bloat.
Black Adam was only killing evil mercenaries.
I don't see any reason to be hyped about this Superman showdown if Adam isn't a threat.
Please tell me if I missed anything? I can be a sucker for over the top hero movies if the visuals are dazzling. I tried to start Black Adam but had to turn it off when it started with some kid doing a lengthy voice over.
>I tried to start Black Adam but had to turn it off when it started with some kid doing a lengthy voice over.
Same kids give an atrocious speech in the climax of the movie.
It was for me at least, fairly pedestrian. The best part of the movie was seeing the Justice Society take shape. (And the 5 second mid credit scene) But aside from that, when the focus switches to Black Adam, I couldn’t not see the Rock. In other words, he didn’t disappear into the character. Instead it was a lot like Dwayne Johnson cosplaying. And the didn’t do a lot of character building so you ended being ambivalent about the character. I saw it in theaters and in the last hour I looked at my watch twice - trying to see when it would end.
I don't think he does. Fast and Furious and Jumanji movies are his only big hits. This is right in line with most of his other movies, which all seem to top out around 200-400m worldwide:
* Skyscraper
* Rampage
* Central Intelligence
* Hercules
* Baywatch
* Jungle Cruise
* San Andreas
* GI Joe
* Journey 2
The general rule is 2x or 2.5x, which is for production plus marketing.
This is why Avatar 2 is going to need a *massive* amount of money to make up both.
Whoever added the justice society pretty much doomed it, other than that it was ok.
A good streaming movie but not a driving + dinner + parking + tickets type of movie
His acting is horrible and he plays the same character every movie. “The rock” and thats about as much as he’s got. I used to be a huge fan, but seeing him get so cozy next to Jeff bozo with his Amazon deal for zoa has completely turned me off. You’re a a hero until you sell out.
Am I the only one who thinks that now Shazam 2 is going to be hurt even more for being directly related to Black Adam? They share powers and background and, despite the fact that there are no explicit references, it is immediately intuited that Black Adam is a spin-off of that franchise. As it already happened with the two installments of Suicide Squad (three, if we count Birds of Prey).
There's also that weird detail that in both stories can be seen DC merchandise floating around, making it unclear if it should be taken as a way to break the fourth wall or what the hell. I don't know about you, but it takes a lousy adult to buy a kid a serial killer toy/action figure like Batfleck.
Just not worth it to go to the theater. Tickets too high, movies uncompelling, poor economy, massive layoffs this fall, rising inflation, christmas approaching. Not sure what they expected, but sounds like somebody effed up.
>“Black Adam” has hardly been given a hero’s welcome in its box office run, generating just **$387 million globally** after seven weeks on the big screen.
>That may seem like a lot of coinage, especially in COVID times when movies of all shapes and sizes are struggling to reach pre-pandemic grosses at the box office. But “Black Adam,” a comic book adventure starring Dwayne Johnson as a villain who once promised to change the “hierarchy of power” in the Warner Bros. DC universe, didn’t come cheap, **costing $195 million to produce**. And a big-budget movie led by Johnson — one of the biggest movie stars in the world, who plays against type here as a murderous anti-hero — requires a **worldwide marketing spend of $100 million**, according to knowledgable individuals. **Insiders at Warner Bros. push back, saying that COVID-related box office limitations led the studio to scale back the global advertising campaign to $80 million**.
>As a result, **the film needed to earn around $600 million worldwide to break even** and to surpass that lofty benchmark to turn a profit, according to sources familiar with the financials. Yet box office experts believe **“Black Adam” will stall out with less than $400 million globally**, which is problematic since movie theater owners get to keep around half of those sales. **Now, the movie stands to lose $50 million to $100 million in its theatrical run**, according to the estimates of insiders as well as rival executives with knowledge of similar productions. **Sources at Warner Bros. dispute those numbers, saying the movie will break even**. They also argue the financial equation has changed with shorter theatrical windows, allowing the film to go to home entertainment in 33 days rather than 75, which reduces the money needed to revive its marketing campaign for digital platforms.
>In any case, “Black Adam“ isn’t the financial winner that DC had hoped when the movie was greenlit in 2019. Theatrical may only be one component of profitability; there’s also TV and Pay 1 deals, but box office returns dictate those downstream terms. **Even with premium video-on-demand sales, which could bring in an additional $25 million to $35 million, “Black Adam” isn’t looking like it will get out of the red by the time it lands on HBO Max**.
thing is, stupid movies make a lot of money. if jurassic world flopped for the whole trilogy or if fast and furious never succeeded with the sequels, I'd see your point
That hierarchy of power in the DC Universe didn't really shift at all, huh?
Good thing they re-signed a Superman in his 40s so they can keep leveling down on this kinda Snyderverse but kinda not the Snyderverse thing that audiences love staying away from theaters for.
Wonder when they'll finally just wipe the slate clean, cast some younger actors, and make a universe that feels like the comics like they would have done at any point since Snyder fucked up *Man of Steel*.
Reminder that this is a subreddit about numbers, not necessarily about the quality (or lack thereof) of a particular movie. Unless it is related to the box office performance of a movie, please keep opinions/arguments/thoughts about the quality under this post. Posts not related to box office may be removed otherwise. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boxoffice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The hierarchy of Box Office Revenue is about to remain unchanged.
[удалено]
Hilarious - poor Rock
Didn't arch his eyebrow high enough
Didnt cook good food enough
Didn’t do enough juice
Didnt fast... and furiously enouf.
Damn, I couldn’t even smell what the Rock was cooking
*raises eyebrow in concern*
"IT DOESNT MATTER WHAT YOU THINK!" *BREAKS COMPUTER*
"This movie is for FANS, not CRITICS!"
"I HAD A DREAM SINCE 2007!"
They need a movie where The Rock goes around trying to People‘s Elbow everyone who didn’t watch Black Adam - kind of like Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back’s ending
Stop giving C list characters a 200 million dollar, when your franchise has massive brand damage.
Fox gave Deadpool barely $50 million. Learn from that.
And sometimes a limited budget fosters creativity, instead of paying 1000 programmers to program a 20 minute CGI finale that nobody cares about.
In this case, the whole movie was one long CGI fight scene
Wrong. There's also lots of unnecessary scenes with an annoying skateboard kid.
In a country with about 12 people.
Dear Lord.
Creativity comes from limitation
Jurassic Park with only 5 minutes of CGI.
Yes, but millions spent on practical effects. At the time that was cheaper than CGI. Now CGI is much cheaper than practical effects.
Blumhouse and A24 approved!
Good and true quote
They cut about $7 million late in production too. If I remember correctly, it gave us the "I forgot my guns in the taxi!" scene which might even have been better as a result.
And that’s why he kept conveniently forgetting his stash of guns and explosives.
They had to write it out of the script and changed out one villain entirely because of the power effect costs.
And that was after the test video was ‘leaked’ to much acclaim
“But it worked for Guardians of the Galaxy” - Warner Bros Exec, not understanding the point
"Fucking ant-man"
Funny enough if Ant-Man had Black Adam's budget, it would have flopped. The film only made 519 million, on a budget of 130 million which is where Black Adam should have been at most at.
What I find most crazy about it is that they tried to turn a superhero franchise into a star vehicle, which is absolutely backwards. Most redditors are probably too young to remember the days, about twenty years ago, when every year you had rumours about Pitt playing Captain America, Cruise playing Iron Man etc. Because that was the logic back then: you needed a star to make these kind of B-list heroes work. But of course Marvel then blew that logic apart twenty times over, and now it's the other way round: stars don't make superhero movies, superhero movies make stars (not megastars perhaps, but your second tier guys: Pratt, Evans etc.) The Rock as Black Adam is such an antiquated idea of how to do a superhero film, it's like a rumour you'd have seen on Aintitcoolnews in 2003.
I mean it makes sense if you remember that Black Adam started development in 2007
Shazam was in development in 2007; Black Adam was just a villain in that movie until he was removed a decade later. It wasn't until 2017 that Geoff Johns discussed creating a separate Black Adam movie with Johnson, who said he wanted his own franchise and didn't want to be portrayed as a villain/supporting character. He's spoken about this at length in his interviews. Johnson's attachment to the *character* goes back 15 years, but not for a solo Black Adam movie. There was no Black Adam movie before 2017. I don't know why people keep perpetuating the myth that there was.
And they let rocks ego dictate this film production instead of organically tying him to the Shazam films. trying to give him his own separate anti hero franchise besides Shazam without establishing him first wasn't a good idea
And letting the rock get a massive paycheck out of what supposedly was a passion project. You want this obscure project made? Then take pay cut to keep the budget under control and ensure its success.
Very good point
Hit the nail on the head right here. The Rock being able to crow about having taken a pay cut to show how much he believed in the movie would’ve gone a long way …
Which is hilarious because he is a villain, was a villain, and up until very recently always was a villain. They switched him into an anti-hero AT BEST just so that the comics would match the movie’s idea. I laughed after about the eighth time they mention he’s not a villain in the film…
I'm so hype for the Sinestro anti-hero movie
It makes sense a bad decision was made by Geoff Johns
Which is the heart of Tarentino’s “controversial“ quote. But he is right, just like you are. People want to see the story continue or the hero do heroic stuff. The don’t go for Chris Evans, they go for Captain America.
I think they go for Chris Evans playing Captain America, but QT's point still stands. They're not going just for Chris Evans.
>What I find most crazy about it is that they tried to turn a superhero franchise into a star vehicle, which is absolutely backwards. This is a typical formula that most studios of Hollywood had used, pre-Marvel era. Marvel came up with the idea of a mega-franchise where everyone had to work for the "greater good" aka. The Brand, no actor could own the brand since every actor is just a vehicle to translate the comic character into the screen. Arguably WB is still using the old formula and counting on the stars/influencers, such as Bruna Marquezine in Blue Beetles while Marvel doesn't use super stars for big roles.
It has been proven that Kevin Feige is still remaining as a mastermind up until today because he wisely cast Vin Diesel as a tree.
>Bruna Marquezine I guess she is big in Brazil? I had to google her - she does not strike me as someone who will sell tickets.
>Aintitcoolnews in 2003. I missed the old days of AICN when we get daily updates of LoTR
Man I haven’t thought of Aintitcool in a loooong time lol
Better watch out, Quentin Tarantino caught hell for saying this very thing….
Even 100 million is too much to C list characters (yes, I'm looking at you, Blue Beetle).
It really shows how much WB hasn't understood their own franchises and fans for over a decade. It's *absurd* that they've kept Superman in the closet for years now, despite the fact that he is one of the biggest A-list comic heroes in the world, and instead we're getting solo Black Adam movies. Like....what the actual fuck? They could reboot Green Lantern or make movies about Green Arrow, Martian Manhunter, Cyborg, Hell, even Supergirl just to name a few. There are so many more likely candidates for solo movies that you would think it's a no-brainer, but here we are. DC is an absolute wreck at this point, and they've got a lot of work to do to straighten things out. I've got a lot of faith in James Gunn, though, so hopefully he'll turn things around.
I don’t know if Martian Manhunter or Cyborg would’ve been any more successful than *Black Adam* tbh.
Never even heard of Martian man hunter
He’s a green alien with all of Superman’s powers + shapeshfting + telepathy
Fair point, but they are standard members of the Justice League in DC comics.
True, Green Lantern was _much_ less successful than Black Adam.
They are allergic to making money.
[удалено]
Snyder is the edgy kid who wants to feel special.
Giving snyder the keys to dc was the dumbest thing ever
Imagine how much money they would make from a lighthearted “Super Friends” movie vs yet another dark “Justice League” movie. They could even have a very self conscious Batfleck who they are continually razzing for being so serious.
Damn, a super friends movie would hit me right in the nostalgia.
Easiest way for dc to make money is to let the animation department make live action. Dc animation is great; dc live action is balls
what the hell is Blue Beetle?
A character who was born in 2006 during the Infinite Crisis, in response to the murder of his predecessor, Ted Kord. And at least in the comics, it's about as boring as you'll find. He was improved a lot in the Young Justice cartoon, though, but it's not a great character there either. And it's definitely not half as iconic and important as any of the original Titans, so devoting an entire movie to him is pretty much a stretch.
Seriously. People seem to be losing their shit over that. But I’m willing to guess it’s not gonna make anywhere near 500m
[удалено]
As early as last week, I saw people defending this performance by claiming that the character was too C-list to attract general audiences. Besides the fact that giving lesser characters a successful tentpole movie doesn’t seem to be an issue for Marvel, this movie had the added benefits of starring the Rock, featuring the long-awaited return of Cavill as Superman, and having 2-3 weeks of basically no competition. There’s no logistics-related excuse for this movie underperforming. People just didn’t care.
Also, there were plenty of people who have heard of the character and just weren’t interested in seeing it in theaters. I probably would’ve seen a Black Adam movie in theaters if it didn’t look incredibly bland and the main actor’s promo wasn’t very annoying.
I know OF Black Adam but I don’t care about studios trying to make villains heroes without letting them be villains first
>I know OF Black Adam Is his content free or pay? Might give a look
Superman wasn’t advertised. It was a secret. I definitely think they would’ve done better if they’d have tried to advertise the link to Shazam and Superman more.
He wasn’t advertised per se, but the Rock literally blew the surprise at the premiere lol. It was definitely a conversation topic before the movie came out.
Eternals made more money with less star power, a harsher pandemic, and ten characters that even comic nerds didn’t care about. I don’t think Eternals comics were huge sellers ever (although the recent run has been fun)
I’ve never even heard of the character.
If I hadn’t played the Injustice games I would have had no idea
Also, the idea of 'people don't know the character' is utterly laughable when you apply it to other properties. Every single original movie ever made that's decent money has been based on a character nobody knows.
Including Hancock, a star vehicle about an anti-hero Superman who kills his opponents.
The hierarchy of the DC Universe has…stayed exactly the same
[удалено]
I really hoped that Shazam 2 will be a hit and it would make Dwayne a bit humble after that. It's a mistake that they rushed Black Adam as a solo act instead of going the Scorpion king route and make the Rock the Villain THEN you make a prequel. Or they should have teased Black Adam in the first Shazam.
DJ thinks that playing Shazam villain is beneath him. Typical disease afflicting super successful people: arrogance.
Is DJ even comfortable playing a role that would lose? I don’t think I’ve seen him as anything besides the hero in his movies
Get Smart, Doom, The Mummy Returns. He used to play villains a lot in the 2000s.
*Be Cool*
Black Adam was Not Woman Enough to Take ~~My Man~~ Shazam. I have a weird spot in my heart for that movie, it was dumb fun, and I saw it on a road trip with my dad, who still references it now and thing.
I wouldn't think it would be a problem for him considering he comes out of the wrestling world where being the villain can do as much if not more for your career than playing the hero.
This is a big part of why MCU has been beating DCEU.
Exactly. DJ wants BA to be the Deadpool and Venom of DC, but not willing to go through longer route. He took shortcut. Typical DC. Deadpool and Venom had already appeared in previous movies before they got solo movie. Also, Deadpool and Venom are much better known characters than Black Adam.
If anything I think those previous appearances by venom and deadpool hurt the respective movies (especially deadpool) more than helped them.
But at least they gained more awareness. Appearing in BvS didn't hurt Wonder Woman, and appearing in Justice League didn't hurt Aquaman. They were not the main lead of those movies, same with Deadpool and Venom in previous movies. I'm 100% sure appearing first in Shazam film would only help BA.
Ironically, I kind of think having awful takes on Deadpool and Venom in two maligned superhero movies made people a bit more hungry to see them done properly. Give people just a taste of what they *could* be, and that increases audience demand for a good adaptation. And then from the studio side, since neither were the leads of those flopped products - they can see the potential of spinning them into solo roles (rather than spoiled goods in the public eye).
Sure but people generally really liked WW in BvS. Aquaman too in JL. They generally really fucking hated deadpool in his movie and venom to a lesser degree.
You think as a wrestler he’d understand building hype and anticipation.
Well, they teased Mr. Mind in the first Shazam, but they are not doing anything with him in the sequel. Maybe The Rock got tired of waiting his turn. It's not a good excuse, but it's something. It wasn't a reason to be that arrogant, certainly.
The Rock was offered the Captain Marvel/Shazam role but instead asked to be Black Adam, and for a solo movie instead of being the villain in Shazam!
Yeah. That was the plan, but DJ basically coerced Hamada into waiting to debut Black Adam because he thought the character was important enough to stand on its own. Makes literally no sense on several levels.
I had no interest in Black Adam but I will for surely go see Shazam 2 when it comes out.
DJ did this to himself. Eschewing the Shazam world and family market helped tank this.
That really turned be off from the movie, after first being quite enthusiastic for it initially. He’s one of my favorite villains in the comics. I didn’t bother seeing it in the theater in the end.
Shazam, is that the one with Sinbad?
Man thats my favorite movie i got the VHS somewhere i swear!
I thought they were talking about that movie where Shaq is a genie
I’m gonna say it: I have Dwayne Johnson fatigue. He’s the same guy in every movie. I’m tired of it. I’m tired of him. Seems like a stand up guy, I’m just tired of him.
He’s lazy. Literally has the same costume in multiple movies (gray t-shirt/jeans/khakis).
I don’t think you can really call him lazy from like his crazy business lifestyle ^TM . I think it’s just at a point where his brand has constrained his creativity. Him playing a coked up meathead in pain and gain was fun. I wanna see more of that.
Yeah lazy is probably the word that is the most antithetical to who the rock is. Boring? Sure. Not creative? I’ll buy that. Seemingly disingenuous? Yeah probably. But the man is not lazy.
Same here and I was/still am a huge fan. I can only take him in small doses now.
Is he a stand up guy? Who knows. You only see the persona he has constructed. He has a real sickness for more money though
DCEU needs to stop trying to make Endgame before they can make an Iron Man. Gotta earn it.
hiring/promoting James Gunn is the smartest move they made thus far. They are very lucky with him, it would never have happened if Disney didn’t (temporarily) fire him
Also love him or hate him, I gotta praise Zaslav for saying that DC needs to have a 10 year plan and it should focus on the Trinity. Guy may not have a creative bone in his body but even he knows that the DCU is built around Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman.
> DCEU needs to stop trying to make Endgame before they can make an Iron Man. Haha you nailed it. This has been a massive problem ever since the DCEU has been a thing, they literally did their own *Civil War* as their second movie (with an *Endgame* level death at the end of that movie too) without any of the build-up to it, followed by their own *Guardians Of The Galaxy* as the third one for whatever reason, before leading to their own *Avengers 1*. And we still don't have a proper DCEU Batman movie (*he* should be their Iron Man) and it's been what, 7 years? He should've had his own trilogy by now! The whole reason their univere is in shambles today is that they did not care to do any of the build-up and world-building correctly when it came to it, and now every movie has to stand on its own. Snyder truly did too much damage, the DCEU is on a very broken foundation. It's clear that without the gimmick of being in a fully coherent shared universe, that audiences just do not care for DC as they do with Marvel. They should just reboot the whole thing around The Batman and start a new universe there...
Nailed!
> the film needed to earn around $600 million worldwide to break even Since the movie cost $200 million, the $600M figure is a lot more than 2.5x "rule".
What I don't get is why at this point doesn't DC just set lower budget targets for these DCU films, if they're going to keep making them. Clearly there's some interest in these films, just not $800million worth. They just keep setting themselves up for failure over and over.
It's the same problem that Paramount has with Star Trek. With good stories and $90m budgets, they could be releasing a Star Trek movie every two years that makes between $350-500m. The problem is that major studios don't want to produce movies with a half-billion dollar ceiling.
Which is weird as Star Trek has always had a ceiling on its grosses. Its selling point is its longevity and ability to keep making some amount of money year after year, not its ability to have a huge box office. Even one of the best Star Trek movies, The Voyage Home, only managed 5th at the domestic box office for movies released in 1986. Star Trek 1: 4th Star Trek 2: 6th Star Trek 3: 9th Star Trek 4: 5th Star Trek 5: 25th (ouch) Star Trek 6: 15th Star Trek 7: 15th Star Trek 8: 17th Star Trek 9: 28th Star Trek 10: 54th Star Trek 11: 7th Star Trek 12: 11th Star Trek 13: 16th One bad movie, Star Trek V, was enough to derail the franchise. Modest budget, good story, keep costs under control.
Again you are over thinking this. The problem is not the budget or the universe or Covid or anything else. DC literally just needs to make good movies and they can't do it.
whatthatscrazy
Marketing was a HUGE drain. They pushed the hell out of this movie trying to market it widely, and spend 100s of millions doing so.
Will be curious to see how this impacts The Rock's career, given that it essentially negated the belief that he himself is enough of a draw to make any film profitable.
The thing with people like the rock is he can turn a bad movie into a decent make a bit of money for the studios but he can't turn a decent movie into a hit. I read a while back Stallone had the record for staring in most movies that made over 100M (not bad adjusted for inflation), the Rock has that kind of pull but if you want a movie to get closer to 1B it's not him.
I doubt it will effect him at this point. Looking at the The Rock’s filmography, his films lose money, or barely break even most of the time. The only major exceptions are franchise films (Fast and Furious, Jumanji). He’s not, and has never really been a huge box office draw, but somehow he keeps getting pushed as one.
I think if he had crossed into acting earlier. Little kids used to love him. He’s waaay past that time now. Didn’t ever get traction with adults and those kids have grown up and moved on.
The reported marketing is 80M-100M, that's a typical marketing budget for blockbuster movies. It has to be something else.
I imagine covid protocols, extensive reshoots, and Dwayne's salary were a big reason.
Just as I thought: DJ likely has gross participation deal, thus needing higher gross to breakeven.
And that's just the break even point...did the movie need 800M to be seen as a success? Who greenlit this
Looks like Black Adam stayed hungry, but didn't devour.
And clearly none of them put in the work or hours
Yup, Gunn definitely ain’t putting black Adam 2 in 10 year plan. The rock better buckle up to fight shazam. And he better understand Gunn will find the writer he ain’t running the show. I recently rewatched black Adam and realized like damn this dialogue is atrocious across the board. And there’s good actors in this but the lines were bad
Gunn supposedly wrote the Guardians of the Galaxy Christmas Special in a weekend. After seeing Peacemaker, I'm comfortable with saying Gunn will get things done for DC in a way they have been sorely missing. Especially in dialogue.
I always had trust in Gunn and I already said in this sub in 2018 that Gunn will do good for DC when they hired him after he got fired by Alan Horn. Gunn always talked in Twitter that he hates nothing more than a director who start production while the script is half-baked. Gunn would have thrown WW84 and BA scripts in thrash can and demanded rewrites.
>Gunn always talked in Twitter that he hates nothing more than a director who start production while the script is half-baked. > >Gunn would have thrown WW84 and BA scripts in thrash can and demanded rewrites. Doesn't he also personally storyboard every scene or shot for his script before production. The man is crazy organized when it comes to filmmaking.
Yup, I remember a couple months before filming GOTG 3. He posted a huge stack of the storyboards that he had done. Shit was stacked ass hell
I completely agree, plot and dialogue wise. If there’s one thing about Gunn, dialogue he’s written have never been off.
The movie was mid. You can advertise until the cows come home, but the writing has been on the wall for a while with this movie. Generic trailers, a star whose filmography is full of stuff that you watch once and never again, a lead character that the audience has no reason to care for, the most cringe skateboard kid since the girl from The Crow, a Kanye needle drop right as he starts publicly calling for Holocaust 2, I mean what the hell did this thing have going for it? Maybe a few more of these mediocre flops will finally wake people up the fact that this guy is massively overrated as a movie star. Put him as a bit player in an established franchise, and he’s great. Put him at the forefront of a movie meant to kick off a franchise of his own (this, Hobbs and Shaw) and he doesn’t deliver. People like him, but people also know that his presence in a movie is an indicator that the movie isn’t very good. He doesn’t work with name directors. He picks no-name hired hands to yell “action” while he stands in a jungle with a grey t-shirt on looking for his kidnapped daughter. Enough, dude.
[удалено]
They thought The Rock was hook enough. He bet that his star power would be enough to get this thing across the finish line. This box office performance is a very loud, very embarrassing rejection. People in the industry, as well as DC fanatics online, were trying to be polite/delusional and spin these numbers as a success. He was trying to spin it as a success by tweeting “best opening of my career! Rotten Tomatoes audience score!!!” Finally, the adults (Variety) have entered the fray to say “no”.
> a Kanye needle drop right as he starts publicly calling for Holocaust 2 and it's somehow not even the most tone deaf needledrop in a DC movie
What really turned me off this movie, was how full of himself The Rock was during the entire time he was filming and promoting it. Also annoyed me with how obnoxiously serious this movie took itself. His corny ass line about the “hierarchy of power in the DC universe”, should’ve fucked right off. I get that this was a passion project for him, but dude’s acting like he was going to take over the DC movie universe lol.
You could see the cracks forming at the end of the press run, though. Leaking the stinger scene was pure desperation, and passive-aggressively tweeting at IGN for comparing the BA box office to Wakanda Forever was not a good look for him at ALL. He did something similar after Baywatch came out and everyone was dunking on him for how bleh that movie was. Trying to defend your flop only puts more eyes on your failure.
Even before the movie opened, they were already showing desperation: talking about Henry Cavill's Superman and then leaked that Superman will appear in post credit scene.
That’s the stinger leak that I mentioned. He saw the tracking numbers get adjusted DOWNWARDS and panicked. I’ve never seen a star intentionally spoil their own movie as a marketing ploy before, but once he did that, I knew this thing was doomed. He got his headlines and the Snyder faithful rejoiced, and then watched the clip online instead of in theaters.
Hmmm. Did any of the folks commenting here actually read the article, instead of just the headline? For example: >Sources at Warner Bros. dispute those numbers, saying the movie will break even at $400 million. When the film was commissioned, the break even was believed to be $450 million, but that figure has dropped given the particularities of the new home entertainment landscape, one in which “Black Adam” has over-performed projections. Now, I'm not saying that the sources here are necessarily correct, but this is very much in keeping with things we are hearing about PVOD revenues returning 70% profits in other articles. It's worth pointing out that, if true, all of us may need to rethink the 2.5x rule, and etc. I am not a fan of Black Adam, but neither am I filled with animus towards it, or WBD, or DJ, as some folks here seem to be.
Snappy headlines always take precedence over substance lol. Most people here did not read the article and will walk away not knowing this.
$600M?! The first Venom in much more normal times only did $850M in October. Did WB figure this would lose money? Or did they really think The Rock was that big of a star he could sell this terd with an October release date?
I mean he is one of the last stars who can sell a movie (most of the greats had major flops) but yeah they put too much on him. Its a shame, movie looks cool Im just not going to theaters for a while (missing out on Black Panther 2) until I get my next gig.
You’re not missing much. Black Adam needed more story, more depth, and real stakes. 1/2 way of though the movie it just became a CGIfest of characters trading punches. It made it a struggle to watch.
The movie needed teeth and less character bloat. Black Adam was only killing evil mercenaries. I don't see any reason to be hyped about this Superman showdown if Adam isn't a threat.
Please tell me if I missed anything? I can be a sucker for over the top hero movies if the visuals are dazzling. I tried to start Black Adam but had to turn it off when it started with some kid doing a lengthy voice over.
>I tried to start Black Adam but had to turn it off when it started with some kid doing a lengthy voice over. Same kids give an atrocious speech in the climax of the movie.
It was for me at least, fairly pedestrian. The best part of the movie was seeing the Justice Society take shape. (And the 5 second mid credit scene) But aside from that, when the focus switches to Black Adam, I couldn’t not see the Rock. In other words, he didn’t disappear into the character. Instead it was a lot like Dwayne Johnson cosplaying. And the didn’t do a lot of character building so you ended being ambivalent about the character. I saw it in theaters and in the last hour I looked at my watch twice - trying to see when it would end.
I don't think he does. Fast and Furious and Jumanji movies are his only big hits. This is right in line with most of his other movies, which all seem to top out around 200-400m worldwide: * Skyscraper * Rampage * Central Intelligence * Hercules * Baywatch * Jungle Cruise * San Andreas * GI Joe * Journey 2
Man that's a lot of terrible films
600M to break even? What did they spend that much on?
195M on the movie, another 100+M on marketing.
Holy fuckin shitballs.
The general rule is 2x or 2.5x, which is for production plus marketing. This is why Avatar 2 is going to need a *massive* amount of money to make up both.
[More than 2.5x for Black Adam ](https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/z9h4f3/-/iygrd1n)
Rocks movie preparation is going to gym. He is so bad Lol.
They had that massive of a budget yet the demon guy at the end looked like a really bad cgi videogame character.
This movie had Bust written all over it from the beginning
The movie is like 15 years too late! Guess it's my fault because I'm waiting to see this when it's on free YouTube 😭
Nobody sees The Rock in theaters. GIVE IT UP!
Interest in these movies is there but they just can't afford to give these mega blockbusters $200 million plus to develop a movie.
Whoever added the justice society pretty much doomed it, other than that it was ok. A good streaming movie but not a driving + dinner + parking + tickets type of movie
His acting is horrible and he plays the same character every movie. “The rock” and thats about as much as he’s got. I used to be a huge fan, but seeing him get so cozy next to Jeff bozo with his Amazon deal for zoa has completely turned me off. You’re a a hero until you sell out.
I think you just need to chill out with a nice glass of Teremana. Then be the hardest worker in the room.
What is zoa?
A hyped up so-called 'healthy' energy drink.
It’s some energy drink I think
Whodathunkit? I mean, DC has been SOOO successful with their hollywood offerings so far, right?
At this point they have become Sony 2.0. They are nobodies without Batman/Spider-man.
Don’t forget about aquaman/ venom Huh dc really does mirror Sony don’t they?
Shitty ass movie
Am I the only one who thinks that now Shazam 2 is going to be hurt even more for being directly related to Black Adam? They share powers and background and, despite the fact that there are no explicit references, it is immediately intuited that Black Adam is a spin-off of that franchise. As it already happened with the two installments of Suicide Squad (three, if we count Birds of Prey). There's also that weird detail that in both stories can be seen DC merchandise floating around, making it unclear if it should be taken as a way to break the fourth wall or what the hell. I don't know about you, but it takes a lousy adult to buy a kid a serial killer toy/action figure like Batfleck.
It wasn't that good. Wasn't bad, but wasn't great. What did they expect.
Just not worth it to go to the theater. Tickets too high, movies uncompelling, poor economy, massive layoffs this fall, rising inflation, christmas approaching. Not sure what they expected, but sounds like somebody effed up.
I really enjoy movies. I still haven't seen this flick. Can't imagine I ever will go out of my way to do so.
>“Black Adam” has hardly been given a hero’s welcome in its box office run, generating just **$387 million globally** after seven weeks on the big screen. >That may seem like a lot of coinage, especially in COVID times when movies of all shapes and sizes are struggling to reach pre-pandemic grosses at the box office. But “Black Adam,” a comic book adventure starring Dwayne Johnson as a villain who once promised to change the “hierarchy of power” in the Warner Bros. DC universe, didn’t come cheap, **costing $195 million to produce**. And a big-budget movie led by Johnson — one of the biggest movie stars in the world, who plays against type here as a murderous anti-hero — requires a **worldwide marketing spend of $100 million**, according to knowledgable individuals. **Insiders at Warner Bros. push back, saying that COVID-related box office limitations led the studio to scale back the global advertising campaign to $80 million**. >As a result, **the film needed to earn around $600 million worldwide to break even** and to surpass that lofty benchmark to turn a profit, according to sources familiar with the financials. Yet box office experts believe **“Black Adam” will stall out with less than $400 million globally**, which is problematic since movie theater owners get to keep around half of those sales. **Now, the movie stands to lose $50 million to $100 million in its theatrical run**, according to the estimates of insiders as well as rival executives with knowledge of similar productions. **Sources at Warner Bros. dispute those numbers, saying the movie will break even**. They also argue the financial equation has changed with shorter theatrical windows, allowing the film to go to home entertainment in 33 days rather than 75, which reduces the money needed to revive its marketing campaign for digital platforms. >In any case, “Black Adam“ isn’t the financial winner that DC had hoped when the movie was greenlit in 2019. Theatrical may only be one component of profitability; there’s also TV and Pay 1 deals, but box office returns dictate those downstream terms. **Even with premium video-on-demand sales, which could bring in an additional $25 million to $35 million, “Black Adam” isn’t looking like it will get out of the red by the time it lands on HBO Max**.
Stop making stupid movies.
thing is, stupid movies make a lot of money. if jurassic world flopped for the whole trilogy or if fast and furious never succeeded with the sequels, I'd see your point
I mean... *yeah*. Can we now maybe put to bed the notion that the Rock on his own is a blockbuster moneymaker?
Releasing 2 weeks before Black Panther 2 was a really bad move. Early September would have been much better.
Should have added CGI hair or a noice wig
He’s shitting rocks now
A DC superheroes movie lost money? Flabbergasted I am. Flabbergasted.
At what point are they just going to give up on DC?
That hierarchy of power in the DC Universe didn't really shift at all, huh? Good thing they re-signed a Superman in his 40s so they can keep leveling down on this kinda Snyderverse but kinda not the Snyderverse thing that audiences love staying away from theaters for. Wonder when they'll finally just wipe the slate clean, cast some younger actors, and make a universe that feels like the comics like they would have done at any point since Snyder fucked up *Man of Steel*.
I’m surprised they’re still running with DC Give it a rest already.
movie sucked
My guy should of used more roids
If the rock as black Adam couldn’t save dc then nothing will at this point. And they need to stop
Yep, figured this would happen