·3 replies
shaleiroseSome people are extremely overstating the DCU's lack of commercial success.
Was Superman as big of a hit as Warner Bros. wanted it to be? No, but it still made $600M coming off of the DCEU's soured reputation with a character who hasn't been successful in live-action since the 1980s. It was a moderately successful film, and served its purpose as the proof of concept for both the character and the franchise moving forward.
Clayface was made on a smaller budget and is on pace to finish with around 4x what it cost to make.
Lanterns was extremely successful for HBO, pulling in viewership numbers that were just under some of their other most popular shows.
The DCU's only real financial disaster was Supergirl, nothing else. A 75% hit rate on their first four projects (Creature Commandos is animated and Peacemaker Season 2 was a continuation of the DCEU) is a pretty good foundation
This
The money move would’ve been keeping Gunn and Safran and letting them cook. It’s still early days in the reboot and they’ve done a good job
Firing Gunn and potentially rebooting again makes zero financial sense
·1 replyshaleiroseSome people are extremely overstating the DCU's lack of commercial success.
Was Superman as big of a hit as Warner Bros. wanted it to be? No, but it still made $600M coming off of the DCEU's soured reputation with a character who hasn't been successful in live-action since the 1980s. It was a moderately successful film, and served its purpose as the proof of concept for both the character and the franchise moving forward.
Clayface was made on a smaller budget and is on pace to finish with around 4x what it cost to make.
Lanterns was extremely successful for HBO, pulling in viewership numbers that were just under some of their other most popular shows.
The DCU's only real financial disaster was Supergirl, nothing else. A 75% hit rate on their first four projects (Creature Commandos is animated and Peacemaker Season 2 was a continuation of the DCEU) is a pretty good foundation
inflation is real
man of steel made more money than supes25 10 years ago
even f***in josstice league made more money than supes25supergirl made less money then morbius
- Himothee
This
The money move would’ve been keeping Gunn and Safran and letting them cook. It’s still early days in the reboot and they’ve done a good job
Firing Gunn and potentially rebooting again makes zero financial sense
They’re literally about to make the same mistakes the DCEU did by rushing another Justice League movie
- Himothee
“Superman’s $618M box office was not impressive to Skydance either, as the film lacked “pop culture impact” in their eyes”
https://twitter.com/discussingfilm/status/2120037882811588785You need to read the article man it directly says financially too
can’t wait for the next superman movie to include him saving the people at the festival
- ·1 reply
peacemaker industry plant ass character
·1 replyshaleiroseSome people are extremely overstating the DCU's lack of commercial success.
Was Superman as big of a hit as Warner Bros. wanted it to be? No, but it still made $600M coming off of the DCEU's soured reputation with a character who hasn't been successful in live-action since the 1980s. It was a moderately successful film, and served its purpose as the proof of concept for both the character and the franchise moving forward.
Clayface was made on a smaller budget and is on pace to finish with around 4x what it cost to make.
Lanterns was extremely successful for HBO, pulling in viewership numbers that were just under some of their other most popular shows.
The DCU's only real financial disaster was Supergirl, nothing else. A 75% hit rate on their first four projects (Creature Commandos is animated and Peacemaker Season 2 was a continuation of the DCEU) is a pretty good foundation
Man of steel and Bvs made the same amount or more
Scattbest superhero movie in years but Israeli jr thinks it didn’t make an impact
Yup. Ellisons know they don’t have a leg to stand during Gunn when it comes to Superman making money so they blame vague things like “pop culture impact”
They fired Gunn bc the movie was viewed as anti-Israel simple as
mjpplusThat raises the question of do they want to spend any more money on the movie to do reshoots or would they just stick with what they have and try to make it work?
Priorities are unpredictable
The flash spending money to reshoot that doofey ending with George Clooney instead of at least trying to fix some of the terrible special effects for example
Will be fascinating to watch it play out cuz everything’s on the table atm
- ·1 replyHimothee
This
The money move would’ve been keeping Gunn and Safran and letting them cook. It’s still early days in the reboot and they’ve done a good job
Firing Gunn and potentially rebooting again makes zero financial sense
with this logic they should have let the rock keep cooking
XavierManeBrotha thats literally whats happening
Supergirl bombed, Superman did alright but stalled overseas, Clayface is cool but aint moving the needle. No one cares bout the TV shows. Now its over. DC doesn't even have anything announced 2028 and beyond besides Batman part 2
Lanterns was objectively successful
·1 replymjpplusThat raises the question of do they want to spend any more money on the movie to do reshoots or would they just stick with what they have and try to make it work?
God all of this reminds of synder/whedon JLU
- BrainWorms4U
God all of this reminds of synder/whedon JLU
karma
- ·3 repliesPUFF SHENRON
inflation is real
man of steel made more money than supes25 10 years ago
even f***in josstice league made more money than supes25Man of Steel didn't have a decade's worth of sour reputation of a previous failed franchise to shake off when it released. It released right after the super successful Dark Knight Trilogy
- ·1 replyPUFF SHENRON
with this logic they should have let the rock keep cooking
Difference is Gunns output was making money and was critically acclaimed and beloved by audiences
·1 replyshaleiroseSome people are extremely overstating the DCU's lack of commercial success.
Was Superman as big of a hit as Warner Bros. wanted it to be? No, but it still made $600M coming off of the DCEU's soured reputation with a character who hasn't been successful in live-action since the 1980s. It was a moderately successful film, and served its purpose as the proof of concept for both the character and the franchise moving forward.
Clayface was made on a smaller budget and is on pace to finish with around 4x what it cost to make.
Lanterns was extremely successful for HBO, pulling in viewership numbers that were just under some of their other most popular shows.
The DCU's only real financial disaster was Supergirl, nothing else. A 75% hit rate on their first four projects (Creature Commandos is animated and Peacemaker Season 2 was a continuation of the DCEU) is a pretty good foundation
Business wise it woulda made more sense to see what MOT did to confirm whether this vision was getting ppl invested or if ppl were tuned out before making a big move like this
- Himothee
Difference is Gunns output was making money and was critically acclaimed and beloved by audiences
hahaha yeah supergirl is gonna win the oscar
- ·1 replyHaroldsChicken
Man of steel and Bvs made the same amount or more
Context.
Superman released AFTER the DCEU soured the public's opinion of DC as a brand
Man of Steel and BvS released right after the most successful and beloved DC trilogy ever
·1 replyTo be fair, $618M for a major CBM ($225M budget) has never, ever been seen as impressive or noteworthy until Superman came out
MoS’ performance wasn’t even impressive and it did $675M in 2013. We were kinda gassing that understandably. You needed at least a 7 in front of that and it missed out on that from lack international base
- PUFF SHENRON
peacemaker industry plant ass character
*james Gunn plant
- ·1 replyYANDHI
To be fair, $618M for a major CBM ($225M budget) has never, ever been seen as impressive or noteworthy until Superman came out
MoS’ performance wasn’t even impressive and it did $675M in 2013. We were kinda gassing that understandably. You needed at least a 7 in front of that and it missed out on that from lack international base
Iron Man made $585M what are we talking about
- ·1 replyshaleirose
Iron Man made $585M what are we talking about
In 2008 from a Marvel Studios that had to find distributors. This was pre-Disney. They were an independent studio
$585M in 2008 is very different ticket tales and value than 2025
- ·1 replyshaleirose
Context.
Superman released AFTER the DCEU soured the public's opinion of DC as a brand
Man of Steel and BvS released right after the most successful and beloved DC trilogy ever
You guys keep saying "DCEU changed the audience perception so this is impressive numbers after that"
Superman was between Toy Story and Lilo and Stich
the excuse of " well 10 years ago bvs dropped so people have been mixed on dc" is old man. The movie was marketed how it was marketed and it did what it did.
- shaleirose
Man of Steel didn't have a decade's worth of sour reputation of a previous failed franchise to shake off when it released. It released right after the super successful Dark Knight Trilogy
