MightyDargon

The only reason anyone is saying WB had a "good year" with a straight face is Barbie. Everything else other than Wonka (which was successful but not a super blockbuster) was a disappointment or bomb. So WB did NOT in fact have a "good year".

People seriously think Jonathan Majors is getting rehired because of an interview?!?!? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Only in this forum would people think a 2 week difference matters for a Godzilla movie.

Aquaman still sucked and still bombed despite what the die hards on here think. It mainly looks "good" because it didn't bomb as bad as Flash and got a lucky release slot. I guarantee another slot would've gotten a sucky gross.

It was the year of Jonathan Majors, it just wasn't a GOOD year...

What's done is done for Marvels. The macro problem was dumping so many resources into the Kang arc. If they had kept Majors/Kang they would see even worse results.

I don't because a lot of good movies still got kicked off of screens because of Aquaspam. "No dominant movie" doesn't mean everything gets to breathe, it just means a crappier movie eats up screens.

The only thing I take issue with is that somehow Aquaman 2 be treated as "better" than Flash just because the real budget number hasn't leaked yet. It'll have a higher gross than Flash likely just because of the Christmas weekend but it's actually a bigger waste IMO because WB could have put out a movie that would have actually gone somewhere (i.e. gone over 200 mil US) in Aquaman 2's release slot. Put Aquaman 2 in the Marvels slot and it likely does what Marvels did considering how bad WB is at promoting things that aren't Barbie/Wonka.

What an absolute waste of a Christmas release slot. Another studio should have counterprogrammed it with...something. At least we know why they ran like scared rabbits from the Avatar 2 slot last year.

No, it actually is a pretty big failure. People in this thread were just losing perspective because The Color Purple held worse. If it gets to say 275-300 mil that's still lower than Black Adam.

It's really not doing well. It's struggling against Migration (which looked basically DOA at opening). I don't think anyone's expecting it to somehow pull out an Avatar 2 or PiB style hold. We need to stop this "Aquaman didn't fail" talk right now.

The trades have zero reliability, they're industry shills. We only learned the "real" costs of the Sony movies after the Interview leak, for example. Maybe some dissident within WBD leaks the "real" spending costs, maybe not. But I seriously doubt a movie stuck in post as long as Aquaman 2 was somehow came in with a "normal" budget.

If you think Aquaman actually cost 205 mil with all the reshoots and reedits I have beachfront property in Kansas to sell you.

I think there could be a sequel to the movies. A studio that is NOT WB probably would have started on it by now. But WB management is howlingly bad.

Meh, if I were King I would avoid WBD movies like the plague, HP or not. The studio is deep in debt and 2 out 3 of its Christmas releases failed. Take the win and go find a studio that's at least somewhat reliable and stable. And HP movies are not very "director driven" since Yates was quite bland but did a half dozen of 'em.

Aquaman DID objectively bomb, only got "saved" by the Christmas release, will still lose boatloads of money thanks to reshoots, and is only getting talked up here now because it's not The Marvels. It's a sequel to a billion dollar grosser that's struggling to outpace Migration. And it's eating up screens that could go to objectively better movies.

I wasn't really expecting Migration to do well since Wonka ate up enough family business. Anyway it's a good result for it.

So Migration is actually doing pretty well? It looks like it's blowing out Purple and tieing Aquaman 2.

Because the book is in the weird category of "things most people know exist and can name but haven't actually read". This is not a quality judgment on the book, it's just that "literary award winner The Color Purple" is a book many people can cite as acclaimed but didn't actually read at some point in their lives. In contrast Roald Dahl is still pretty widely read among kids.

Again, they make their money off concessions, not the movies themselves. Concessions have always had an inflated price vs. what food should cost.

Theatres absolutely SHOULD cut ads but the idea that food prices would fall is beyond ridiculous. Food has skyrocked up EVERYWHERE since the pandemic. Since theatre operators mainly make money from concessions they won't lower it.

I see "people hate all musicals" is the NEW new "Avatar had zero cultural impact". Despite a trial run of "kids don't like Mario" which didn't work for some raisin.

I mean, they're not even trying to market it or make it look enticing. They're just claiming people will show up by default.

Being VERY optimistic about the post Christmas run I see

The argument was "zero pop culture relevance" not "screenplay is brilliant/bad"