- 5,892
- 6,287
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2012
Gotcha
It just seemed things got "too real" over my man Deadpool, lol
DC Studios THREAD - GunnVerse Begins - Chapter ONE: Gods & Monsters
It just seemed things got "too real" over my man Deadpool, lol
- 16,421
- 2,164
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2012
$270M :x for a movie that wasnt a sure thing? Iron Man 1s Budget was $160M. Hell Avengers Budget was $220
They should've only destroyed half of NYC in retrosprect.
- 73,130
- 59,892
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
Singer was coming off X1 & X2, which were big hits. WB was also coming off a BB ride, which was a decent hit. So I think they were a bit more confident in the film. This might also be the reason, along with GL bomb, why WB/DC isn't just making a movie for every member of JL all at once. They are taking it one step at a time.
IM1 was also a risk, RDJ was paid a lot less and though very talented, he was coming off the lowest point in his career. So it was still very risky, read up on reports, that film became a success of off luck and talent. Bridges & RDJ and director Favreau had to improvise much of the film and dialogue and was being rushed. All of them were surprised they even finished the film and became as big of a success that it was.
SR is considered profitable comparison to John Carter that had a $250m budget (before marketing) and made $280m worldwide.
IM1 was also a risk, RDJ was paid a lot less and though very talented, he was coming off the lowest point in his career. So it was still very risky, read up on reports, that film became a success of off luck and talent. Bridges & RDJ and director Favreau had to improvise much of the film and dialogue and was being rushed. All of them were surprised they even finished the film and became as big of a success that it was.
SR is considered profitable comparison to John Carter that had a $250m budget (before marketing) and made $280m worldwide.
Last edited:
MarvelSux
formerly brucewayne
- 2,204
- 1,230
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
superman returns, what did they spend all that money on? horrible cgi?
- 16,421
- 2,164
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2012
I agree with you. I was pointing out that IM1 was only 160 mill because it was so risky. Avengers (sure thing) was still less than superman budgetwise. The **** was WB thinking?
rell826
Banned
- 6,740
- 2,125
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2013
Unlike Superman Returns, John Carter was actually good. That budget was too big for a franchise people had no idea existed. Shame it barely profited because I wanted to see the sequel.
meek meals
Banned
- 6,867
- 1,769
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
Will Smith, Idris Elba, or Jamie Foxx for John Stewart . . .
Make him a military dude who just doesn't give a damn . . . also make Green Lantern a Star Wars + Wolverine Orgins type franchise where there are lots of different heroes
Guaranteed money . . . plus we see more Black Superheroes in hollywood . . . Static Shock is long overdue but that isn't coming anytime soon since he has no relation to the JLA
I was reading up on what happened to the Static property and apparently it was relaunched a few years ago with some DC writers (who never saw the show or read the OG comics) making a lot of unnecessary changes, and running off the OG Milestone writer
Would hate for it to be done . . . The cartoon was the first black superhero I saw and it was cool to see him put in the same echelon as Batman, Superman, Green Lantern, etc. (in the cartoon)
Anyways Bryan Cranston should have been Hugo Strange
- 7,640
- 4,419
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
John Carter was good? That's one movie I stayed away from due to word of mouth, not being impressed with the trailer, and never really caring for the source material. It had the look of those Sam Worthington Clash/Wrath of the Titans movies I didn't care for as well.
Also didn't care for this Taylor dude looking like a variant of the guy from One Tree Hill.
I might check it out next time it's on tv.
Also didn't care for this Taylor dude looking like a variant of the guy from One Tree Hill.
I might check it out next time it's on tv.
the nomad
Banned
- 2,452
- 736
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
the nomad
Banned
- 2,452
- 736
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
Didn't say it was movie of the year, and I read a few books after seeing the film with my son, it did better than Marvel when it comes to cannons.at John Carter was good.
7/10.
Last edited:
rell826
Banned
- 6,740
- 2,125
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2013
How about you hop of my ****. I enjoyed the movie unlike most of the comic book crap.
Last edited:
Sir San Diego
formerly brolic scholar
- 12,456
- 10,878
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2011
When dudes say "hop off my nuts" Jimmies have officially been rustled.
I'm dying here at work and I've said it few times in my NT history. Just funny to see it in a comic book thread. We can find anything to argue about on here.
*tears
the nomad
Banned
- 2,452
- 736
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
"You gon' LIKE John Carter"
When dudes say "hop off my nuts" Jimmies have officially been rustled.
*tears
- 73,130
- 59,892
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
- 73,130
- 59,892
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
Back to the film.... A poster on CBM posted this about Affleck and it makes sense. I'd have to see Daredevil again to judge for myself since I've avoided it like a plague ever since it's release but this does sound about right.
To those in doubt, well....
To those in doubt, well....
Last edited:
- 7,640
- 4,419
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
I felt Ben was incredibly stiff as DD and boring as MM. I saw the attempt at being charming but it didn't land for me (I tried watching DD a few days back on FX, didn't finish) but maybe that was the writing.
For me I never hated Ben's acting. Even 10 years ago which seems the difference ppl like to state. Back then he just had a few more bad choices for roles. My thing is that overall he isn't that great of an actor. Yes, he's picked better roles, written and/or directed better ones for himself but nothing that has amazed me or made me love his performance. Just good to really good at best and I can always see his limitations. He's a far better director than actor.
We shall see though. Maybe being a comic book fan and having a passion for this role will bring out his best. I still got hope for Battfleck, especially after this MOS sequel and he gets to do his own thing in the solo Bat movies.
Last edited:
the nomad
Banned
- 2,452
- 736
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
Daredevil was good, I just hated Bulleye's costume and Kingpin ...James Gandolfini or Vince D'Onofrio would've been better.
- 73,130
- 59,892
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
I felt Ben was incredibly stiff as DD and boring as MM. I saw the attempt at being charming but it didn't land for me (I tried watching DD a few days back on FX, didn't finish) but maybe that was the writing.
For me I never hated Ben's acting. Even 10 years ago which seems the difference ppl like to state. Back then he just had a few more bad choices for roles. My thing is that overall he isn't that great of an actor. Yes, he's picked better roles, written and/or directed better ones for himself but nothing that has amazed me or made me love his performance. Just good to really good at best and I can always see his limitations. He's a far better director than actor.
We shall see though. Maybe being a comic book fan and having a passion for this role will bring out his best. I still got hope for Battfleck, especially after this MOS sequel and he gets to do his own thing in the solo Bat movies.
Maybe this will help. Depending on the writing, he may just need to do what Bale did in Nolans trilogy, which to you doesn't really test his acting chops? I think that is a good and positive way of looking at things, also keeps the expectations low? Affleck doesn't need to be the center of attention and Batman isn't the primary focus of the film.
I am still hoping to GOD that Batman is a secondary character to Superman.
Last edited:
- 3,871
- 329
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2006
ben affleck wasn't what made daredevil bad
it was the writing and directing.
the same person in charge of the ghost rider movie
it was the writing and directing.
the same person in charge of the ghost rider movie
- 3,942
- 885
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
We need some stability in action hero actors. Ben can pull it off, I've got faith in the dude. Ben can be Bruce.
- 16,421
- 2,164
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2012
Every time I come into this thread I am reminded that the Superhero genre, if you can call it that" sucks for the most part. Damn.
- 7,640
- 4,419
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
That would've been interesting. D'onofrio can get real methodical with it. Wonder why he doesn't get more work now since CI has been done for a few years now.
While it wouldn't test his acting chops I'd be incredibly disappointed if the writing for the Batman/Bruce Wayne character was Nolan level. Might as well bring back Clooney in if that's the case if we're getting a hollow Bruce with a deep voice Bats again. Even if he is secondary, a repeat Nolan imitation will kill my expectations for future Bat movies with Ben at the helm (even though it wouldn't be Goyer writing). I have low expectations for the MOS sequel in general but to me what Battfleck does is pretty important. I don't think there's much avoiding that there'll be a distraction for fans who are mainly coming to see Batman in this new shared universe.
I felt Ben was incredibly stiff as DD and boring as MM. I saw the attempt at being charming but it didn't land for me (I tried watching DD a few days back on FX, didn't finish) but maybe that was the writing.
For me I never hated Ben's acting. Even 10 years ago which seems the difference ppl like to state. Back then he just had a few more bad choices for roles. My thing is that overall he isn't that great of an actor. Yes, he's picked better roles, written and/or directed better ones for himself but nothing that has amazed me or made me love his performance. Just good to really good at best and I can always see his limitations. He's a far better director than actor.
We shall see though. Maybe being a comic book fan and having a passion for this role will bring out his best. I still got hope for Battfleck, especially after this MOS sequel and he gets to do his own thing in the solo Bat movies.
Maybe this will help. Depending on the writing, he may just need to do what Bale did in Nolans trilogy, which to you doesn't really test his acting chops? I think that is a good and positive way of looking at things, also keeps the expectations low? Affleck doesn't need to be the center of attention and Batman isn't the primary focus of the film.
I am still hoping to GOD that Batman is a secondary character to Superman.
- 4,153
- 336
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2005
Batman > Superman. That's why.
