Shazam! Fury of the Gods | March 17 2023 | Sandberg returns to direct. Will Sinbad return? | Get vaccinated!

[Alex SciChannel]

18 minutes ago, Verrows said:

Why does everything need to have some world shattering event with mystical creatures, things erupting from the ground and buildings tumbling down?

Why shouldn't we?

19 minutes ago, Verrows said:

It's getting old and boring,

I don't think so. If it was some generic aliens or supervillains maybe. But I think the basis in mythology gives it a nice twist this time imo.

 

Look I don't know why I'm an outlier here. But this trailer's moments got me emotional and even teary eyed for a character I'm not a big fan of but liked the first movie.

[Menor the Destroyer]

I am definitely not someone who is against world destruction stakes in CBMs, but there are good and bad ways of doing it. You have to sell it and neither trailer has done that for me. 

[Skim Beeble]

sub 100m domestic go brrrr

[Verrows]

2 minutes ago, Alex SciChannel said:

Why shouldn't we?

I don't think so. If it was some generic aliens or supervillains maybe. But I think the basis in mythology gives it a nice twist this time imo.

 

Look I don't know why I'm an outlier here. But this trailer's moments got me emotional and even teary eyed for a character I'm not a big fan of but liked the first movie.

That's great, really. At the end of the day I want every movie to succeed, even the ones I'm not as fond of. 

[cax16]

5 minutes ago, Alex SciChannel said:

Why shouldn't we?

I don't think so. If it was some generic aliens or supervillains maybe. But I think the basis in mythology gives it a nice twist this time imo.

 

Look I don't know why I'm an outlier here. But this trailer's moments got me emotional and even teary eyed for a character I'm not a big fan of but liked the first movie.

I thought the trailer was fine, I also loved the first movie and trust Sandberg so I’m not concerned about this at all. The issue I see for the movies box office is you need that built in hype from somewhere to provide good wom and I don’t think this movie has it, I think the delays have really hurt it and most of the GA has probably forgot about the first movie by now. 

 

I’m hoping for the best for the movie cause of how much I enjoyed the first one.

 

[dudalb]

6 minutes ago, Verrows said:

That's great, really. At the end of the day I want every movie to succeed, even the ones I'm not as fond of. 

I disagree. I want bad movie to fail; bad movies suceeding just causes more bad movies to be made.

[kayumanggi]

$60M - $65M / $155M - $165M

 

[BestPicturePlutoNash]

zzzz

[Verrows]

33 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I disagree. I want bad movie to fail; bad movies suceeding just causes more bad movies to be made.

None of us are in a position to be the arbiters of which movies are bad enough that they should fail at the box office for the greater good. None of our opinions are that important. What's bad in your mind and therefore shouldn't succeed at the box office, might be a great, fun movie for many others for which they will support theatres. That's a win for me, especially because it doesn't stop me from skipping the movies I don't want to see or think look bad.

[Eric Lasagna]

44 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I disagree. I want bad movie to fail; bad movies suceeding just causes more bad movies to be made.

I always hate this "bad movies succeeding means more bad movies are made" fallacy. No filmmaker or producer or even executive, including the ones that you hate, set out to make a bad movie. Every single one is a total crapshoot from greenlight to post-production.

[MovieMan89]

Why wouldn’t this fall off big from the first? There was nowhere near enough buzz generated from that movie to lead to any kind of sizable OW here and these movies are simply not the type that are going to ignite via spectacular WOM. They’re too slight for that. So if no decent OW and ho-hum legs, where is the money coming from?
 

Not to mention everyone knows now they are basically hitting reset on the DCU soon, all of these movies in the franchise this year feel like leftovers that have already expired. The only thing it has going is light competition, but we are well out of the box office era where weak competition alone can make a movie gross. 

 

40-50% drop in gross DOM and OS imo. 

[Firepower]

2 hours ago, Eric Slay said:

No filmmaker or producer or even executive, including the ones that you hate, set out to make a bad movie.

Except Sony with their SMCU, you won't ever convince me Venom 1-2 and Morbius were made with good intentions, they don't even treat SMCU stuff like real movies, it was never intended to be good.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Firepower

[DAJK]

I think this looks great, but I am starting to fear that this could go the way of The Suicide Squad at the box office.

[WittyUsername]

I liked the first one, and I certainly don’t want this to be bad or anything. I just can’t bring myself to have much enthusiasm for any of the DC movies this year, on the count of all the drama and uncertainty about the future. 
 

For my money I think this was a fairly generic trailer that, as others have said, puts too much emphasis on the CGI action, instead of the family dynamic. It doesn’t look as generic as something like Black Adam, but I wonder if David F. Sandberg may have overexerted himself here.

[dudalb]

I loved the first, but a bit afraid this one might make the mistake of taking itself too serously.

And what is the budget for this one? First was brought in for 100 Million if they spent a lot more on the sequel they might have a problem.

[Napoleon]

37 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I loved the first, but a bit afraid this one might make the mistake of taking itself too serously.

And what is the budget for this one? First was brought in for 100 Million if they spent a lot more on the sequel they might have a problem.

It looks much more expensive. I wouldn't be surprised if it has a similar budget to Black Adam.

[Firepower]

They said you were a giant. They said you can crush a man's skull with one hand.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Firepower

[poweranimals]

2 hours ago, DAJK said:

I think this looks great, but I am starting to fear that this could go the way of The Suicide Squad at the box office.

Why? The Suicide Squad paid for the sins of the first Suicide Squad movie. Not to mention BOP. Shazam was actually good though.

Edited January 27, 2023 by poweranimals

[OncomingStorm93]

The first trailer was decent. This new one was terrible. Entirely devoid of the charm that made the first Shazam! a surprise treat. Now it looks like another overly dramatic grey-tinged cgi festival.

 

I'm not saying I think it's going to be a bad movie (I'm staying hopeful) as much as I'm saying I think this marketing approach isn't the right take for this property. Unless it actually is reflective of the film, in which case... Ouch.

 

Either way, I'd say right now I'm thinking $45m OW, $115m DOM, $300m WW. And those are respectable numbers (but not impressive enough to warrant Gunn's attention) if the $125m budget reported last summer by Rolling Stone holds up. Prior to this new trailer, I was thinking it would match the first film. Now, I don't see it. And if the rest of the marketing follows this approach, I'd go lower. I just don't see this being what fans of the first film wanted.

[AJG]

Drake's whiny voice from that song we all laughed at TEN YEARS AGO really adds to how dated this movie looks imo. It's just a bad trailer.