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

[jak9]

3 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

From Aug 2022

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-news/batgirl-shelved-warner-bros-1392407/

 

With Batgirl, studio executives faced a situation where they could spend another $7 million to $9 million in postproduction and special-effects costs — and perhaps more in reshoots — to try to get the movie to a place where it could stand alongside some of DC’s similarly small gambles, like the upcoming Shazam! Fury of the Gods, whose budget is $125 million.

That's the budget THOUGH. Maybe they went under budget and it's closer to $100 million than $125 million? Just speculating... I guess we'll find out soon enough.

[MightyDargon]

I'm going to take a VERY unpopular tack on this debacle and not blame either Levi or Gunn.

I blame the Rock.

If he wasn't gonna do a cameo in either Shazam 1 or 2 HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BLACK ADAM.

This is like if Shadow the Hedgehog somehow got his own "2 hours of I am very badass" solo movie yet somehow didn't appear alongside Sonic because his VA had a triceratops shoved up his butt.

I'm glad Gunn vetoed Black Adam 2. Actors who are too "big" a name to actually do their part in a series ain't worth it.

[MightyDargon]

3 minutes ago, jak9 said:

That's the budget THOUGH. Maybe they went under budget and it's closer to $100 million than $125 million? Just speculating... I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Its likely OW is gonna be poor enough that 100 vs. 125 mil is unlikely to matter. I know people on here love that ancient "Puerto Rico" joke but an actual poor open (vs. "below expectations") can't really be saved.  It's not a PiB situation either where the actual source (i.e. Shrek) was still memorable to some generations either. I don't really see what this movie has going for it.

It's too bad, I totally would have been on board for "Shazam Family vs. Monster Society of Evil" which the Shazam 1 stinger pointed to. I don't know why they chose this instead.

[TalismanRing]

11 minutes ago, jak9 said:

That's the budget THOUGH. Maybe they went under budget and it's closer to $100 million than $125 million? Just speculating... I guess we'll find out soon enough.

 

Why would it go under budget or be the same budget as 4 years earlier?  Cast salaries must have risen, there's more VFX and there's inflation.  $125m sounds like the low end.

[TalismanRing]

13 minutes ago, MightyDargon said:

I'm going to take a VERY unpopular tack on this debacle and not blame either Levi or Gunn.

I blame the Rock.

If he wasn't gonna do a cameo in either Shazam 1 or 2 HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BLACK ADAM.

This is like if Shadow the Hedgehog somehow got his own "2 hours of I am very badass" solo movie yet somehow didn't appear alongside Sonic because his VA had a triceratops shoved up his butt.

I'm glad Gunn vetoed Black Adam 2. Actors who are too "big" a name to actually do their part in a series ain't worth it.

 

The person to blame was the one running is the studio that allowed The Rock to call the shots.  They could have said no.  They should have said no, because he was also a bad fit for the character.  He should have done Lobo where he could have use his biggest asset - his outsized charm.

[kayumanggi]

I'm surprised by the reviews.

[MightyDargon]

5 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

The person to blame was the one running is the studio that allowed The Rock to call the shots.  They could have said no.  They should have said no, because he was also a bad fit for the character.  He should have done Lobo where he could have use his biggest asset - his outsized charm.

Lobo isn't THAT important in DC though. Getting a guy who demands as big a back end as Rock to play a niche character like that seems even jankier than Black Adam.

 

Pretty sure he would've walked if he didn't get what he wanted and I think WB was still in the "big star money" mindset which really doesn't work for superhero stuff. Losing Rock (at least in theory) would have given DC bad PR that the old studio bosses wanted to avoid. I think buzz is largely independent of stars now unless if it's Tom Cruise, but Hollywood is slow to learn.

[MightyDargon]

1 minute ago, kayumanggi said:

I'm surprised by the reviews.

I'm not. If they had good ones they would've shown 'em off like D&D is doing. This is only slightly faster than 65's review speed.

[kayumanggi]

4 minutes ago, MightyDargon said:

I'm not. If they had good ones they would've shown 'em off like D&D is doing. This is only slightly faster than 65's review speed.

 

I mean after seeing the movie. I haven't seen 65 so I can't speak for it, but I thought FURY OF THE GODS was good.

[kayumanggi]

 

[tonytr87]

1 hour ago, MightyDargon said:

Lobo isn't THAT important in DC though. Getting a guy who demands as big a back end as Rock to play a niche character like that seems even jankier than Black Adam.

 

Pretty sure he would've walked if he didn't get what he wanted and I think WB was still in the "big star money" mindset which really doesn't work for superhero stuff. Losing Rock (at least in theory) would have given DC bad PR that the old studio bosses wanted to avoid. I think buzz is largely independent of stars now unless if it's Tom Cruise, but Hollywood is slow to learn.

 

Lobo is more well known than Black Adam. Lobo at least appeared in several Superman cartoons. I hadn't heard of Black Adam until the Rock started talking about him. 

[Johnny Tran]

2 hours ago, jak9 said:

I've also seen $125 million. I suspect that you might be right, but I think it's closer to $125 million than $150 million.

 

Well if you've seen $125M why not post it here for us.  It doesn't look like a $150M movie to me 

Edited March 16, 2023 by Johnny Tran

[John Marston]

top critics are destryoing this movie 

[filmlover]

This weekend's thread is truly going to be quite something.

[thajdikt]

14 minutes ago, John Marston said:

top critics are destryoing this movie 

Holy shit I know top critics can be harsher and there can be a difference from all critics to just top critics but mid 30´s for top critics when it´s at 67% is something I have never seen before

[Dragoncaine]

15 minutes ago, thajdikt said:

Holy shit I know top critics can be harsher and there can be a difference from all critics to just top critics but mid 30´s for top critics when it´s at 67% is something I have never seen before

It's at 69% now from what I can tell, wild that there's such a notable gap but I'm positive the All Audience score will catch up with Top Critics in no time. Nowhere near 36%, sure, but it feels like rotten will 100% happen.

[keysersoze123]

Despite the number I feel the movie would have benefited had they allowed reviews a week earlier. At least the discussion on the movie would have helped presales better. 

[kayumanggi]

I DON'T LIKE Grace Randolph but her review mirrors my thoughts about this 100%. And she's saying the budget of this is just 100M? I kinda doubt that, but it would be great if it was true since this has been tracking very poorly.

[Spidey Freak]

3 hours ago, TalismanRing said:

 

The person to blame was the one running is the studio that allowed The Rock to call the shots.  They could have said no.  They should have said no, because he was also a bad fit for the character.  He should have done Lobo where he could have use his biggest asset - his outsized charm.

 

I don't get the appeal of Lobo tbh (and apparently neither do the majority of folks as the character has always been fringe). 

 

The Rock should have been Shazam! himself. It's what I've been saying since 2015 or whenever the DCEU road map was first shared. He could have given a star-making turn to an Egyptian actor as Black Adam to play the sympathetic antagonist in his Shazam film and we would be looking at a very different situation right now.

[Ken]

For reference's sake, when this movie was greenlit at the end of 2019, the superhero movie calendar looked like this:

 

2020

Feb-Birds of Prey 

Mar-Bloodshot (from Valiant: remember that?!)

Apr-The New Mutants

May-Black Widow

Jun-Wonder Woman

Jul-Morbius

Oct-Venom

Nov-Eternals

 

2021

Feb-Shang-Chi

May-Doctor Strange

Jun-The Batman

Jul-Spider-Man

Aug-The Suicide Squad

Nov-Thor

Dec-Black Adam

 

2022

Feb-Untitled Marvel

Apr-THIS MOVIE ON THE 1st and Spider-Verse on the 8th

May-Black Panther (when Boseman was expected to star) and Super-Pets

Jul-The Flash and Untitled Marvel 

Oct-Untitled Marvel

Dec-Aquaman

 

If the following year didn't mess everything up, I wonder if this movie would've stood a better chance or not. (And on an unrelated note, I also wonder if the current complicated MCU feelings would've still occurred).