[Movie] DCEU: Black Adam

[Ragedaug]

First to address the thread, I guess I just find it a little funny how vested the armchair producers get on the importance of the Box Office. I literally can't think of a single reason to care how much they spent on it or what income versus expense ratio a studio has.

Like, I'm not going into a movie thinking "I expect x level of goodness based on how much they spent on writing, production, and marketing".

It's either a movie I enjoyed, or it's a movie I didn't enjoy. I dunno. Just weird seeing people argue about how good a movie is/was based on how many people spent money to watch it. Why do you care who else liked it? Did you like it? If other people didn't like it, does that make you wrong for liking it? If other people liked it, does it make you wrong for not liking it? There's been many movies that I either have or have not enjoyed where most folks out there felt the opposite of me. Doesn't change my opinion of the movie. I guess I'm just trying to understand why you folks get so adamant to argue studio income vs expense.

------------------------------------------------------
Regarding Black Adam, I enjoyed the overall feel. Definitely could nitpick some stuff. Pacing wasn't always the best. Sometimes the dialog was wonky. Plot wasn't super deep, but I wasn't expecting it to be, so that wasn't a problem. There's some contrivance and forced drama, but with the level of expectations I entered with, neither was bad enough to take me out of movie.

I thought they did a great job with Fate and I liked what Brosnan brought to the character. I think I could have really liked Hawkman if the writers did a better job with his story. As it was, I enjoyed the character, but just feel they could have done a lot better with him. Smasher and Cyclone felt mostly irrelevant, so I don't have any real thoughts about them. If they were removed from the movie, I don't think it would have much difference. I really enjoyed Johnson's portrayal of Black Adam. I thought he did good, and thought the writers did a pretty decent job of writing him.

If I had a problem with the movie, it would probably be the villains. Faceless generic bad guys who lack any compelling motivation outside of they enjoy being bad and/or want to take over the world. And the big baddie mostly felt meh. As noted above though, with the expectations I entered with, it didn't bother me when I watched the movie, just something I noted.

I would definitely watch this again when it comes to streaming. Wouldn't watch it a 2nd time at the theater unless a friend or someone in the family asked me to join them, I probably would.

[Koriani]

two quick things here, and i make this reply not to slag you but just to share thoughts on that points of view....SNIP

Just wanted to post not to continue to hijack this thread - but just to say I appreciated your input and not at all felt I was being 'slagged' on =D I totally get, and agree with, all of what you were saying. You reminded me of where movies were coming from in the late 70s/80s - (It wasn't entirely new information, about the Film history periods and such, but information I wasn't really thinking about in the posting) that led to the corresponding 'answer' of shorter/simpler/cheaper movies. As a kid who also grew up not just on 80s action flicks, but also on the earlier 'big productions' like Ghandi and Cleopatra (and Alllllll the big musicals!), it is interesting how these shifts in the fortunes, and watching habits, between studios and audiences, play out in the movies that get made as a result.

And yeah, that's why I fight the 'old fogey' stereotype when my brain wants to go there with the latest "what a piece of crap" movie/streaming tv show trailer -- because I KNOW there are still well written movies and tv shows being made. It just certainly feels like, with the advent of streaming, the 'mainstream viewer' does NOT hear about the well written non-blockbuster stuff on the "direct to streaming" side, and only about the theater-releases (big or small) and whether they are good or not.

I find it very difficult to figure out, among all the dreck offered by the streaming platforms, what is actually well-written and worth watching and what isn't. If it doesn't hit a 'viral social media' sensation it is almost impossible to know what is actually good. Whereas, in most of the decades before the Streaming Studios, you already knew that 'direct to video' were B- grade shleck or less, and the good written stuff DEFINITELY was coming out of the Theater - and so everyone would 'buzz' about it.

Anyway, gonna try and stop hijacking this Black Adam thread with the more existential discussion of the movie business and where its going. =D I'll just close by leaving it with this truth -

"Cocaine - its a powerful drug!" --Rick James

[Malkiah]

But do not make the error of assuming that things will return to previous norms.

i'm not, i was just saying i think the same cycle is repeating for the studio system - that they're reaching this self-induced point where everything has to be a giant budget mega hit or else the studio goes bankrupt, and that isn't sustainable.
sooner or later the general audiences will tire of vapid CGI "punch all your problems away" films, just like the general audience eventually tired of historical epics, and they eventually tired of westerns, and they eventually tired of hypermasculine gun nut fantasy action movies, etc etc.
the only question is that when it starts to happen will the studios see the writing on the wall and adapt their output, or will they die on that hill (perhaps literally) like the studios in the late 60s and early 70s and we see a massive collapse of the entire industry?

Things (non blockbusters) that that the audience used to be very willing to go to a theater to see no longer make that cut. That revenue may seem minor but it is the differnce between making a profit or not in in a normal yeat or going broke in a run of abnormal ones like now. YMMV.

going to have to disagree here in a way, i think that the current state of the audience actually makes it more likely that smaller films can become successful.
obviously not all of them, but that's never been the case.
but, i think the internet makes it so you can make a smaller passion project that ends up getting word-of-mouth and hype to a level that was impossible 20 years ago, and you end up with (for example) things like Everything Everywhere All At Once which was a terrible "movie" (and i use movie in quotes because really it was more a sequence of tropes and cliches strung together by scenes) but had "smaller passion project" energy and wide distribution, and the public responded quite positively to that.
contrast that to Swiss Army Man for example (the first movie by the writer/director duo of EEAAO) which is in every conceivable way a vastly better film but which stayed a tiny indie flick in 2016 and didn't catch fire in the zeitgeist.

anyways, i think there's enough out there (john wick also comes to mind) that shows the potential is still there for a mid-budget concept movie to make it big if it's well done.

[Fencers]

Film will probably not recoup domestic and barely get 450m global. Black Panther 2 will eat everything, no way they are holding on with a 33% drop.

Brutal.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

First to address the thread, I guess I just find it a little funny how vested the armchair producers get on the importance of the Box Office. I literally can't think of a single reason to care how much they spent on it or what income versus expense ratio a studio has.

Because how much they spent on it vs how much it makes is how studios decide if they want to do a sequel. So, if you liked Black Adam and you would like to see a Black Adam 2...you would want the movie to perform well at the box office. Studios don't spend $200 million dollars making a film and X million more dollars on marketing the film just to see it struggle to break even.

Also, in the meta-analysis...if DC movies (That aren't Batman movies) continue to perform poorly at the Box Office... WB is less likely to keep producing DC movies (That aren't Batman movies).

[Biomega]

WB is less likely to keep producing DC movies (That aren't Batman movies).

Ooooh I can't wait for the next Batman movie! Maybe it'll go over his origin story and be really dark and brooding! FINGERS CROSSED, YOU GUYS!

[MCMLXXXII]

Ooooh I can't wait for the next Batman movie! Maybe it'll go over his origin story and be really dark and brooding! FINGERS CROSSED, YOU GUYS!

Martha's pearls scattering across the street, that would be new and refreshing.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Ooooh I can't wait for the next Batman movie! Maybe it'll go over his origin story and be really dark and brooding! FINGERS CROSSED, YOU GUYS!

Martha's pearls scattering across the street, that would be new and refreshing.

To be fair, The Batman took a cue from The latest Spider-Man movies and did not retread over the origin story again.

[JDL49]

First to address the thread, I guess I just find it a little funny how vested the armchair producers get on the importance of the Box Office. I literally can't think of a single reason to care how much they spent on it or what income versus expense ratio a studio has.

Like, I'm not going into a movie thinking "I expect x level of goodness based on how much they spent on writing, production, and marketing".

It's either a movie I enjoyed, or it's a movie I didn't enjoy. I dunno. Just weird seeing people argue about how good a movie is/was based on how many people spent money to watch it. Why do you care who else liked it? Did you like it? If other people didn't like it, does that make you wrong for liking it? If other people liked it, does it make you wrong for not liking it? There's been many movies that I either have or have not enjoyed where most folks out there felt the opposite of me. Doesn't change my opinion of the movie. I guess I'm just trying to understand why you folks get so adamant to argue studio income vs expense. (snip)

Comic Book Movies are much more open ended than almost all other types. They strongly encourage what I will label the completionist tendency. i.e. the belief by the audience that they need to see or be knowledgeable about all of the product in order to keep up. Without adequate B.O. there is no absolutely no support for the audience to believe in the universe and it starts to die.

- - - Updated - - -

going to have to disagree here in a way, i think that the current state of the audience actually makes it more likely that smaller films can become successful. obviously not all of them, but that's never been the case.

It's the $30-$60M picture that's most endangered, not the really big or small ones. Without those the industry is in trouble. Not all of it mind you, but any venue with a lot of screens needs more business than the blockbusters and small movies provide.

- - - Updated - - -

[Fencers]

Ooooh I can't wait for the next Batman movie! Maybe it'll go over his origin story and be really dark and brooding! FINGERS CROSSED, YOU GUYS!

Well, those are also highly successful products and the most recent film eschewed that origin retelling.

If film distributors could publish the exact same movie every single week and make bank, they 100% would do so. Money and brand engagement is the only thing that matters in major film production and distribution.

When they commission T-scripts they specifically mark, "Make this movie like Dances with Wolves but in space" or "Update: Casablanca, on a boat". That is an elevator pitch; "Predator but with Native Americans."

[Ragedaug]

Because how much they spent on it vs how much it makes is how studios decide if they want to do a sequel. So, if you liked Black Adam and you would like to see a Black Adam 2...you would want the movie to perform well at the box office. Studios don't spend $200 million dollars making a film and X million more dollars on marketing the film just to see it struggle to break even.

Also, in the meta-analysis...if DC movies (That aren't Batman movies) continue to perform poorly at the Box Office... WB is less likely to keep producing DC movies (That aren't Batman movies).

I get that the return investment in the first movie dictates future possibilities, I just don't get arguing about that on the internet. It's either gonna happen or not. Our arguments over profitability won't influence that. Then you have studios that are all over the place on their standards for deciding to make a sequel.

I dunno, just seems like a really odd thing to argue over.

[Shadowferal]

https://thedirect.com/article/black-adam-2-sequel

Speaking on the John Campea Show, film producer Robert Meyer Burnett shared that there is already progress being made on a sequel to Dwayne Johnson's Black Adam.

Campea heard reports that the script for Black Adam 2 is already done with the studio potentially ready to "roll into shooting this thing in like four months" should everything be finished by that time:

“… I like the philosophy they’re like, ’Look we waited 15 years to get Dwayne The Rock Johnson as [Black Adam], let’s take advantage of this. He says in this, ‘We’ll have a script ready pretty fast.’ I have definitively heard from somebody on the inside, their script’s done. They’ve got a second script. Now, they may want to tinker with it depending on what how the reactions are to the first film, but they literally could probably roll into shooting this thing in like four months if they wanted to.

He feels that "as long as this movie is profitable," setting the expectation around a $475 million box office return, Black Adam 2 could go into pre-production quite soon:

So I suspect, as long as this movie is profitable. And I’ll set the line at 475 [million dollars worldwide]. If they can make 475 [million dollars worldwide], I think they almost instantly go into pre-production worldwide… But I don’t know. Rob [Burnett], you’re hearing they’re saying we’re going to move it very, very fast on the second one. I mean, obviously we gotta find out how it does to know if they’re going to do a second one. But… how quickly do you think we could see a second 'Black Adam'?”

[Ausr]

The Rock is going to make the DCEU his thing, isn't he?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

https://thedirect.com/article/black-adam-2-sequel

Speaking on the John Campea Show, film producer Robert Meyer Burnett shared that there is already progress being made on a sequel to Dwayne Johnson's Black Adam.

Campea heard reports that the script for Black Adam 2 is already done with the studio potentially ready to "roll into shooting this thing in like four months" should everything be finished by that time:

“… I like the philosophy they’re like, ’Look we waited 15 years to get Dwayne The Rock Johnson as [Black Adam], let’s take advantage of this. He says in this, ‘We’ll have a script ready pretty fast.’ I have definitively heard from somebody on the inside, their script’s done. They’ve got a second script. Now, they may want to tinker with it depending on what how the reactions are to the first film, but they literally could probably roll into shooting this thing in like four months if they wanted to.

He feels that "as long as this movie is profitable," setting the expectation around a $475 million box office return, Black Adam 2 could go into pre-production quite soon:

So I suspect, as long as this movie is profitable. And I’ll set the line at 475 [million dollars worldwide]. If they can make 475 [million dollars worldwide], I think they almost instantly go into pre-production worldwide… But I don’t know. Rob [Burnett], you’re hearing they’re saying we’re going to move it very, very fast on the second one. I mean, obviously we gotta find out how it does to know if they’re going to do a second one. But… how quickly do you think we could see a second 'Black Adam'?”

Well, if $475 million is the target number for a sequel...it's not looking good. Currently, Black Adam is sitting at about $323 million...and Black Panther 2 opens this weekend.

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2728624641/

Grosses
DOMESTIC (42.8%)
$138,445,509
INTERNATIONAL (57.2%)
$184,700,000
WORLDWIDE
$323,145,509

- - - Updated - - -

The Rock is going to make the DCEU his thing, isn't he?

Not with these numbers

[Shadowferal]

The Rock is going to make the DCEU his thing, isn't he?

We'll see in a couple months.

[Koriani]

I get that the return investment in the first movie dictates future possibilities, I just don't get arguing about that on the internet. It's either gonna happen or not. Our arguments over profitability won't influence that. Then you have studios that are all over the place on their standards for deciding to make a sequel.

I dunno, just seems like a really odd thing to argue over.

Well some people use those numbers as a way to defend their opinion to "win" over the opinion of others. As in "You call it crap, I call it awesome - and see IMDB/RT/Youtube/Movie ticket Sales/Profits/Neilson Rankings etc. agree with me! Not you!"

And that's really where the 'argument' resides.

Not denying your point that its silly...but humans arguing, especially on the interwebs, is usually pretty silly. If that's gonna trigger someone (the fact that they are silly or pointless arguments) then they just need to avoid even reading it. Cuz its gonna happen =D.

[Rennadrel]

Actually your points were really good, especially about the "huge bloated insanely expensive epics". I went back and looked at the B.O. since 1950 and imo those whales sank about 1967. There were some big movies after that but they were not standalones as a rule which imo, is what separates the 1950-66 era from what followed.

But do not make the error of assuming that things will return to previous norms. There are massive changes happening in the audience. Stuff that used to work fine no longer does in the way it did before. Mostly it's that streaming has changed the business side. Things (non blockbusters) that that the audience used to be very willing to go to a theater to see no longer make that cut. That revenue may seem minor but it is the difference between making a profit or not in in a normal year or going broke in a run of abnormal ones like now. YMMV.

People are also less likely to go to the theaters knowing that a movie will be on whatever streaming service within a month or so of the theatrical release. With the cost of a night out at the movies going through the roof, it gets really hard to justify when the cost of living also gone up significantly over the last couple of years.

[Ihavewaffles]

The Rock is going to make the DCEU his thing, isn't he?

It all depends on China now..

[Biomega]

It all depends on China now..

Time for him to learn Mandarin and lick Pooh Bear's boots a little!

I hear it's the hip thing to do for ex pro-wrestlers turned movie stars.

[daemonion]

Isn't anyone going to talk about the moment when Sabbac opens the "portal to the underworld" the sky and the effect looks almost frame by frame the same as wen Sylvanas shatters the Crown of domination pre-shadowlands? Other than that, no cinematic masterpiece obviously but kinda fun movie.