DC Movies- if at first you don't succeed...

[Bazza]

6 hours ago, Old Man said:

Fwiw this does seem to be Zaslav’s intention. It’s a bold strategy, we’ll see if it works out for them. 

 

Correct, it is not Zaslav’s intention, but my suggestion for a way to market/distribute mid-tier 'blockbusters' that were previously going direct-to-streaming; and given Zaslav’s statements that he is wanting to support cinemas and have them bounce-back after covid and recent years downturn. 

 

5 hours ago, Ternaugh said:

 

E.T. was released in June 1982, and essentially stayed in theaters for a year and a half. It then came back for a re-release in 1985. I'm guessing that most of the folks who saw it after the first few weeks had already seen it before and were seeing it again. A main difference between then and now is that a home video release didn't happen until October 1988, over six years from the original theatrical release.

 

There's no way that a studio now would even consider delaying revenue from rentals and home video, and so the window has shrunk to about 45 days for most releases now. I wish Warner/DC luck in stretching that window, but I doubt that it would make much difference to the box office.

 

 

You raise a good point that i hadn't considered, revenue. WBD might forgo my suggestion if it means maximising revenue from other streams, licensing to Netflix/cable, home video (DVD etc).  

[Old Man]

4 hours ago, Jhamin said:

 

He takes a lot of time to say what he has to say, but his content is very interesting.

 

My understanding of this video basically boils down to: Kids are buying comics made for kids in numbers far, far larger than adults are buying comics at all.  Too bad Marvel and DC decided they don't care about kids.  A scholastic reader Miles Morales comic has 10x the sales of any of the Marvel Spiderman titles, which shows that they may well buy superhero comics but they aren't being given many reasons too.

 

The YouTuber pitches the theory that both Marvel and DC decided to "age up" with their readers starting in the 90s and abandoned the traditional kid market.  That worked for a while but now we are at a point where 30 years of kids have grown up on Manga (which has tons of adult stuff but *also* has tons of stuff for 8 year olds).  Scholastic has pulled way ahead of both DC and Marvel.  The "big two" traditional publishers don't appear in the top 5 comic book sellers in the big bookstores (which according to this video is where all the growth in comic sales is)

 

So it sounds like third party takes (Like from Scholastic) on traditional comics are the only places these characters are still showing up for actual children.  Kids in 2022 appear to be reading a lot more manga & not a lot of Spiderman.  I know my life-long comic book addiction started when I was 7 years old & if its true that kids haven't been getting into stuff like that for 20 years.. no wonder comic sales are down.  I've seen enough Manga that was pretty cool that I can easily understand how if you got into that when you were in 1st or 2nd grade you might not feel a deep need to keep up on Spiderman anymore.  My Hero Academia, Naruto, and Dragonball seem way more popular than Batman among middleschool kids I run into.

 

After chewing on this for a while, this might actually be the best arrangement.  The suits haven't been able to stop meddling with the creatives for years.  Licensing the writing and characters to Scholastic makes DC and Marvel money, keeps AT&T/WB/Discovery executives out of the way, and actually puts DC and Marvel books in front of kids.  Otherwise the only place to buy floppies nowadays is the FLCS, and FLCSes are few and far between.  DC and Marvel hardly have to sell $5 floppies to monetize their IP.

[Bazza]

29 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

 

https://www.zippia.com/advice/largest-media-conglomerates/

 

 

Checking Yahoo Finance for the top ten companies listed on this web page, three entities have majority stakes in all the ones I was able to check; about three of them, I couldn't. 

 

Basically, the same singular entity/hedge fund has majority stake in nearly all of them. If you think they are seperate, think again. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

I'm not pushing for Warner or DC to fail, but I'm also not in favor of keeping them on life support if they've so badly mangled their business affairs.

 

Well, that's why this guy some people hate so much is in charge.  His job is to change those toxic business policies, stupid marketing approaches, and self-destructive philosophies.  Nobody should bail out DC with government funds (like has happened in the past with banks and car companies), but putting someone ruthless and efficient in charge to save the company means more jobs for the future and maybe saving some businesses that were too stupid to run themselves well in the past.

[csyphrett]

14 hours ago, Jhamin said:

 

He takes a lot of time to say what he has to say, but his content is very interesting.

 

My understanding of this video basically boils down to: Kids are buying comics made for kids in numbers far, far larger than adults are buying comics at all.  Too bad Marvel and DC decided they don't care about kids.  A scholastic reader Miles Morales comic has 10x the sales of any of the Marvel Spiderman titles, which shows that they may well buy superhero comics but they aren't being given many reasons too.

 

The YouTuber pitches the theory that both Marvel and DC decided to "age up" with their readers starting in the 90s and abandoned the traditional kid market.  That worked for a while but now we are at a point where 30 years of kids have grown up on Manga (which has tons of adult stuff but *also* has tons of stuff for 8 year olds).  Scholastic has pulled way ahead of both DC and Marvel.  The "big two" traditional publishers don't appear in the top 5 comic book sellers in the big bookstores (which according to this video is where all the growth in comic sales is)

 

So it sounds like third party takes (Like from Scholastic) on traditional comics are the only places these characters are still showing up for actual children.  Kids in 2022 appear to be reading a lot more manga & not a lot of Spiderman.  I know my life-long comic book addiction started when I was 7 years old & if its true that kids haven't been getting into stuff like that for 20 years.. no wonder comic sales are down.  I've seen enough Manga that was pretty cool that I can easily understand how if you got into that when you were in 1st or 2nd grade you might not feel a deep need to keep up on Spiderman anymore.  My Hero Academia, Naruto, and Dragonball seem way more popular than Batman among middleschool kids I run into.

And older readers are more picky about what happens to their characters. They tend to drop books until something comes along to draw them back in.

CES

[unclevlad]

3 hours ago, csyphrett said:

And older readers are more picky about what happens to their characters. They tend to drop books until something comes along to draw them back in.

CES

 

What I saw, to the limited extent I paid any attention...

--horrible art.  First and foremost.  SO bad that it completely disrupted any attempt to tell a story, at least for me.

--Continuity disruptions.  I think the big one for me was the death of Superman...only to bring him back in so many bizarre ways.

--The storylines I saw got to be beyond ridiculous, MUCH of the time.  

[Christopher R Taylor]

I wasn't super fond of the death of Superman series, but I did actually like the characters they invented to take his place (temporarily).  They are the last batch of actually well designed interesting new characters DC ever came up with including Steel.

[unclevlad]

13 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

I wasn't super fond of the death of Superman series, but I did actually like the characters they invented to take his place (temporarily).  They are the last batch of actually well designed interesting new characters DC ever came up with including Steel.

 

Yeah, they weren't bad ideas, it's the way they were introduced, and the way the whole thing was such a massive retcon.  Retcons BAD.

[Scott Ruggels]

If you want  bit of optimism. Here's some, but this is "if" Zaslav trims the DC books to show he cares:

 

 

[unclevlad]

Guy needs to stop being so easily distracted...

 

There's a lot to be said for starting a reset by cutting WAY back.  I'm looking over what DC's got out now...and it is a jumbled mess.  NINE different Batman series?  

 

One thing tho:  being tied to mega corps means that suddenly paying living wage rates for pages seems unduly optimistic.  It's not how they work.  If the core talent isn't there, then the quality can't be, even if there's better editorial control.

[csyphrett]

7 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

Yeah, they weren't bad ideas, it's the way they were introduced, and the way the whole thing was such a massive retcon.  Retcons BAD.

You wouldn't have liked the 5g plan they were going to do which became the new legacies that no one likes.

 

My issue as a reader was continuity. I just had to stop reading DC because they had ten history reboots that only rebooted part of their line and not the other. It's why their characters have new ethnic backgrounds, new sexual orientations, histories that make no sense, fan fiction type romances, new personalities that don't go with what went before, and Tom King writing alternative takes on heroes that are just bad.

 

 THE HUMAN TARGET DOES NOT INVESTIGATE ANYTHING, YOU STUPID CLOWN!!!!!

 

 It's like picking up the latest book in a novel series and finding the main character is not a white 6'4" 250 pound ex-army major who has decided to wonder America and the world to pick up hot chicks when he can and punch bullies as a hobby, but has become a Nigerian millionaire solving problems on his family estate and flirting with the gardener while his mother harasses him.

CES    

[slikmar]

I said before, one of the biggest problems that DC has always had with their reboots is they want to start characters fresh (I am thinking the first year, which was last time I read them) but then they want to keep Iconic storylines in the character's history (like Killing Joke, etc.). They won't just commit to the reboot. If they did, it might work.

[unclevlad]

15 minutes ago, slikmar said:

I said before, one of the biggest problems that DC has always had with their reboots is they want to start characters fresh (I am thinking the first year, which was last time I read them) but then they want to keep Iconic storylines in the character's history (like Killing Joke, etc.). They won't just commit to the reboot. If they did, it might work.

 

The only one like that I've personally read was Straczynski's Superman:  Earth One...and only volume 1.  I had no problem there, altho I know lots of others did, because to me, only details were changed...mostly modernized from a 30's or 40's basis to a 90's or 00's basis.  One can argue that the ongoing development was...more problematic.  But I also liked Thor having issues after the issues in the latter MCU films.  However, to your point, you want Clark to work through the issues to develop the moral core...or it's not Superman.

 

I think the entire reboot notion just won't work enough of the time.  Rather than a reboot...move forward.  Retire Clark...marry him off to Lois, make the happy ending, bring in Jon as their kid.  Or make it a little weirder...age Lois, let her die.  Clark becomes involved with some other female hero...possibly Diana.  THEY have a kid.  The mix of powers is...non-standard.  Build from there.  I wonder if they got leery of that because that's kinda what they tried with different Green Lanterns, but they made those new GLs putzes.

 

 

[Ternaugh]

1 hour ago, slikmar said:

I said before, one of the biggest problems that DC has always had with their reboots is they want to start characters fresh (I am thinking the first year, which was last time I read them) but then they want to keep Iconic storylines in the character's history (like Killing Joke, etc.). They won't just commit to the reboot. If they did, it might work.

 

Flashpoint. They've done an animated version of the actual story, run a version (sort of) in the CW Flash, threatened to do it with the Wonder Woman sequel, and apparently based their entire pre-merger reboot of the DCEU on it in the Flash movie. They desperately need to move on.

[csyphrett]

2 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

The only one like that I've personally read was Straczynski's Superman:  Earth One...and only volume 1.  I had no problem there, altho I know lots of others did, because to me, only details were changed...mostly modernized from a 30's or 40's basis to a 90's or 00's basis.  One can argue that the ongoing development was...more problematic.  But I also liked Thor having issues after the issues in the latter MCU films.  However, to your point, you want Clark to work through the issues to develop the moral core...or it's not Superman.

 

I think the entire reboot notion just won't work enough of the time.  Rather than a reboot...move forward.  Retire Clark...marry him off to Lois, make the happy ending, bring in Jon as their kid.  Or make it a little weirder...age Lois, let her die.  Clark becomes involved with some other female hero...possibly Diana.  THEY have a kid.  The mix of powers is...non-standard.  Build from there.  I wonder if they got leery of that because that's kinda what they tried with different Green Lanterns, but they made those new GLs putzes.

 

 

Wasn't a reboot. Was an elseworlds.  They don't even use that. And everyone involved has been fired for whatever reason. I know rumor said Berganza the editor liked to harass people in the office.

 

A reboot on the main line is Wonder Woman was made out of clay, is really Zeus's kid, recently became a heroine, served with the JSA in WW2 as did her mother, became a warrior princess, or Green Arrow and Green Lantern are 25 years older than their friends in the League because Editorial forgot how old they were supposed to be, or Cyborg being a founding member of the League and gutting his history with the Titans, changing his age to be older than Nightwing when he was the youngest Titan at one point. Same thing with Black Lightning so he could have teen age daughters.

 

Everything happened is how DC is handling their mainline continuity now.

CES        

 

 

 

 

[Old Man]

3 hours ago, slikmar said:

I said before, one of the biggest problems that DC has always had with their reboots is they want to start characters fresh (I am thinking the first year, which was last time I read them) but then they want to keep Iconic storylines in the character's history (like Killing Joke, etc.). They won't just commit to the reboot. If they did, it might work.

 

I feel like I'm the only person on Earth who not only doesn't mind reboots, but expects them as a core feature of the genre.  AFAIC it's been reboots all the way back to Crisis on Infinite Earths, prior to which continuity was not a thing that people got upset about.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

 

Flashpoint. They've done an animated version of the actual story, run a version (sort of) in the CW Flash, threatened to do it with the Wonder Woman sequel, and apparently based their entire pre-merger reboot of the DCEU on it in the Flash movie. They desperately need to move on

 

 

Yeah I think that DC should just start making movies about interesting stories and stop trying to be Marvel.  Do your own thing, don't require a huge story arc or connected stories, just make character-driven, well-written stories about your heroes.

 

I honestly don't care that much about continuity -- unless the story and the editors try to make it something, then it annoys me when they violate their own continuity.  Its not the consistency of storytelling that bothers me so much as the hypocrisy or inconsistency of the writers.  Either you care about continuity or you do not.  Just pick one and go with it.

[slikmar]

They showed the Black Adam trailer during thursday night football. I liked it and looks good. Loved the Justice Society.

[unclevlad]

24 minutes ago, slikmar said:

They showed the Black Adam trailer during thursday night football. I liked it and looks good. Loved the Justice Society.

 

Saw it.  It has potential...more than the Rams showed, especially.

[Scott Ruggels]

On 8/28/2022 at 3:13 PM, Old Man said:

 

I feel like I'm the only person on Earth who not only doesn't mind reboots, but expects them as a core feature of the genre.  AFAIC it's been reboots all the way back to Crisis on Infinite Earths, prior to which continuity was not a thing that people got upset about.

I think you are the only one. I would love it, if we cou8ld jst assume that the origin happened in another film, and use the time, instead to match the Hero up with one of their villains. and after a few films then either the villains team up, or something happens and the heroes team up. I am tired of seeing Thomas and Martha Wayne dropping to the pavement... again.

[Hugh Neilson]

9 hours ago, Scott Ruggels said:

I think you are the only one. I would love it, if we cou8ld jst assume that the origin happened in another film, and use the time, instead to match the Hero up with one of their villains. and after a few films then either the villains team up, or something happens and the heroes team up. I am tired of seeing Thomas and Martha Wayne dropping to the pavement... again.

 

It's funny how the most iconic characters fall more often into this trope.  Showing a brief "origin in flashback" by providing an "in-context of present adventure" reason to reflect or discuss the backstory is my current preference.

 

Looking at the Marvel movies and TV shows, Netflix split the difference on Daredevil (still just working his way into being DD in the first season) and Jessica Jones (a sort-of origin story in Season 1 with most backstory in flashback form).  Moon Knight quite effectively ran in media res, explaining the backstory in the context of the current story.

 

Spider-Man Homecoming (and the Civil War appearance) didn't need us to see Peter get bitten, and Uncle Ben die, to be effective.  Black Widow worked fine with her backstory left open for years, and we're still waiting for Hawkeye's "origin".  No one even seems to ask why he uses a bow.

 

As I reflect on MCU, though, most movies have incorporated an origin story without focusing on it.  That has worked pretty well.  When the character and story compel an extended origin story (Ms. Marvel, for example), sure.  If not, we can probably get by without it.  We could also see some villains just appear with limited or no backstory before their onscreen debut (if ever).

[Scott Ruggels]

3 hours ago, Hugh Neilson said:

 

 

As I reflect on MCU, though, most movies have incorporated an origin story without focusing on it.  That has worked pretty well.  When the character and story compel an extended origin story (Ms. Marvel, for example), sure.  If not, we can probably get by without it.  We could also see some villains just appear with limited or no backstory before their onscreen debut (if ever).

If they are introducing a character , then it's appropriate to show the origin.  Also the MCU has done it better, in general.  the DCEU had rehashed more often.  Their movies though have not been consistent.

[Hugh Neilson]

In fairness, the MCU has the advantage of far fewer characters with a lengthy history in film, so nowhere near as many opportunities to re-hash an origin story.  The example of Spider-Man when the films re-started with Garfield probably lead the way, and that predated the MCU.  As I recall, there was considerable speculation that the new actor would mean a restart and a new origin, which someone involved indicated was considered, but discarded on the views that many people already know his origin, and those that don't can still understand the movie.

[unclevlad]

17 minutes ago, Hugh Neilson said:

In fairness, the MCU has the advantage of far fewer characters with a lengthy history in film, so nowhere near as many opportunities to re-hash an origin story.  The example of Spider-Man when the films re-started with Garfield probably lead the way, and that predated the MCU.  As I recall, there was considerable speculation that the new actor would mean a restart and a new origin, which someone involved indicated was considered, but discarded on the views that many people already know his origin, and those that don't can still understand the movie.

 

OK, but can't the same argument be made for at least Superman and Batman?  But they often repeat those origins.

 

I think the bigger edge in the MCU is they kept one ongoing storyline for so long, so they tell the origins once, and it still holds 15 movies later.   And since it seemed every reboot was a complete re-interpretation, well, gotta go back over the origins again....

[csyphrett]

I think Cleve is right. I think every time a DC character gets a new movie team, they go back to the origin for whatever reason. I think the newest Batman is the first one that didn't have it as part of their reboot. 

CES