The Flash | June 16 2023 | Ezra Miller, Michael Keaton | We’re stoping the count at a Nice 69% RT (it’s 72% For Real) | Please Remember that Your Enjoyment Of The Film is Not Based On Others Opinions And To Be Nice To Each Other

[Barbie]

This is gonna lose WB like $400 million  What an unmitigated disaster

 

People said #NotMyFlash

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Barbie

[PlatnumRoyce]

Here's a truly dumb fun fact. GHOST RIDER (~17.25M) generated more money on its opening weekend (unadjusted) from female audiences than The Flash (~14.86M) was able to generate. 

 

 

[martin]

3 hours ago, excel1 said:

Its a combo of many things but I think the prolonged gap was likely biggest reason. This movie needed to come out summer 2019 and it Wouk have fared much better 

The biggest problem is,they announced reboot too soon.why not waiting till aquaman2.  blue beetle and Aquaman Will likely get no care treatment from fans.

[Barbie]

13 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

Here's a truly dumb fun fact. GHOST RIDER (~17.25M) generated more money on its opening weekend (unadjusted) from female audiences than The Flash (~14.86M) was able to generate. 

 

 

eva mendes' impact

[AJG]

6 minutes ago, Barbie said:

eva mendes' impact

You’re mistaken 

 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

52 minutes ago, martin said:

The biggest problem is,they announced reboot too soon.why not waiting till aquaman2.  blue beetle and Aquaman Will likely get no care treatment from fans.

Weren't they trying to smack down The Rock's shenanigans? His antics around Black Adam were pretty shameless (fake numbers to Deadline), and courting the Snyder fans with Cavill just gave those fans hope that version of the DCEU would continue. If WB wasn't going to offer The Rock a future with DC, there was no way they could get him to quietly shut up about it until Aquaman 2's release. Plus, there was other DCEU talent probably questioning their futures in private and on social media.

 

WB announcimg Gunn/Safran changed the conversation about DC's future for good, but led to this 12+ months of a lame duck extended universe. After the results of Shazam 2 and The Flash, I bet they're wondering if they made the right choice.

 

 

Deadline's second weekend prediction is hilariously noncommittal.

[excel1]

wb weren't going to let Cavill and his fans think he was coming back for an entire year, they did right thing with handling of that decision 

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

When something flops this hard I always like to go with the first assumption that while there might be loads of noise - and there is certainly LOADS of noise with this film - the primary cause tends to be that there was a cataclysmic misjudgement from the studio (and potentially audience) of the inherent appeal of the film at concept level.

 

Before getting to the Miller shenanigans and the state of DC or the quality of the film, then, I think it's worth just questioning whether it might not have been a massive miscalibration to think a Flash movie - ANY Flash movie that didn't feature an A-Grade established box office star - should have had that kind of price tag or expectation.

 

From the Gustin show, to Titans to the ever-present references in Big Bang Theory, The Flash has been largely a TV-based referent. And Pixar's travails have recently shown how strong the impact can be of small-screen association.

 

I know the finger could go to Aquaman: but Aquaman had an action-adventure style, a thirst-trap pair of leads, and a conventional old-fashioned blockbuster narrative. So even if Aquaman wasn't *Aquaman* it was doing things that have major box office potential aside from resting on the name of the lead character.

 

I think - going into those secondary elements - that people are starting to factor in the notion that the audience perceived the *Dreg ends* of DC being after the announcement of the reboot. I completely disagree. I think the audience have perceived DC as being in *dreg end* phase ever since Justice League. 

 

Plus, again, the issue with Miller I think is as much not being any kind of proven box office draw or star-power as it is the shenanigans. It's one thing to have horrible press if you're Mel Gibson and have opened several movies single handedly. Quite another if you've just had a handful of decent indies and the fifth-credited name in established franchises.

[ZattMurdock]

2 hours ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

When something flops this hard I always like to go with the first assumption that while there might be loads of noise - and there is certainly LOADS of noise with this film - the primary cause tends to be that there was a cataclysmic misjudgement from the studio (and potentially audience) of the inherent appeal of the film at concept level.

 

Before getting to the Miller shenanigans and the state of DC or the quality of the film, then, I think it's worth just questioning whether it might not have been a massive miscalibration to think a Flash movie - ANY Flash movie that didn't feature an A-Grade established box office star - should have had that kind of price tag or expectation.

 

From the Gustin show, to Titans to the ever-present references in Big Bang Theory, The Flash has been largely a TV-based referent. And Pixar's travails have recently shown how strong the impact can be of small-screen association.

 

I know the finger could go to Aquaman: but Aquaman had an action-adventure style, a thirst-trap pair of leads, and a conventional old-fashioned blockbuster narrative. So even if Aquaman wasn't *Aquaman* it was doing things that have major box office potential aside from resting on the name of the lead character.

 

I think - going into those secondary elements - that people are starting to factor in the notion that the audience perceived the *Dreg ends* of DC being after the announcement of the reboot. I completely disagree. I think the audience have perceived DC as being in *dreg end* phase ever since Justice League. 

 

Plus, again, the issue with Miller I think is as much not being any kind of proven box office draw or star-power as it is the shenanigans. It's one thing to have horrible press if you're Mel Gibson and have opened several movies single handedly. Quite another if you've just had a handful of decent indies and the fifth-credited name in established franchises.

That’s the basic consensus among fans of the superhero genre, I’d argue. Also, it’s clear that this film was supposed to be something else but because of Gunn’s take over as DC Studios head, it needed to become something else. Film was supposed to soft reboot the DCU and serve as a vehicle to introduce Keaton’s Batman as the new Batman from the shared universe, with Cavill, Gadot, Momoa and Miller moving ahead and Sasha’s Supergirl and Batgirl as the new additions. It’s sort of like imagine that the MCU never worked out and the first Doctor Strange film was about a soft reboot but there was a change of plans during the film and the lead was accused of the most heinous acts at same time. It’s catastrophic because it was a failure of studio’s management  and strategy and, well, everything that could possibly go wrong went wrong.

Edited June 22, 2023 by ZattMurdock

[WittyUsername]

Surprised no one posted this, but here ya go. Lol

 

[PlatnumRoyce]

 

 

Edited June 23, 2023 by PlatnumRoyce

[Saul Goodman]

This movie is a bigger meme than Josstice League now.

[SpiderByte]

I think it's clear now the Cinemacon reviews were strong because they assumed the CGI was unfinished and not the final product.

[AJG]

7 minutes ago, SpiderByte said:

I think it's clear now the Cinemacon reviews were strong because they assumed the CGI was unfinished and not the final product.

 

It also got boosted by cynical cinema executives that thought audiences were going to go apeshit wild over all those cameos in the last act. 

[excel1]

On 6/22/2023 at 6:05 AM, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

When something flops this hard I always like to go with the first assumption that while there might be loads of noise - and there is certainly LOADS of noise with this film - the primary cause tends to be that there was a cataclysmic misjudgement from the studio (and potentially audience) of the inherent appeal of the film at concept level.

 

100% this though timing is huge element. I think if this film comes out in July 2019, it does much better. Not huge blockbuster but not a flop. They really missed their moment. A Flash film in 2023? No.

[TheDude391]

1 hour ago, SpiderByte said:

I think it's clear now the Cinemacon reviews were strong because they assumed the CGI was unfinished and not the final product.

A few of my friends who saw the fan screenings were also speculating that. That they were easier on the film because they assumed it'd look good after.

[Cappoedameron]

saw it today, it was a fun time. Nothing more nothing less. Definitely not even top 10 best comic book movies.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Cappoedameron

[poweranimals]

I've been out of town and haven't had the chance to see this yet. I was going to go this evening with a friend who was nice enough to wait until I got back, but now he has to postpone until Tuesday. I'm debating going without him but I do feel a little obligated to wait now.

[ZattMurdock]

Quote

During an interview with Screen Rant, the film's supervising sound editor Nancy Nugent revealed some shocking details about where some of its audio was sourced from.

 

"I'll tell you the truth; a lot of them were pulled from YouTube," she said about the cameos. "[We were] finding those old clips, and then it was a matter of removing music if there was music tied to it, or just cleaning it up."

 

 

 

1 minute ago, poweranimals said:

I've been out of town and haven't had the chance to see this yet. I was going to go this evening with a friend who was nice enough to wait until I got back, but now he has to postpone until Tuesday. I'm debating going without him but I do feel a little obligated to wait now.

It opened on my town yesterday. I will try to make time to watch during the weekend, same situation, a friend of mine is tagging along.

[AJG]

3 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

 

 

 

 

 

This is super common now btw. I've seen films use, what are clearly clips pulled from YouTube, as movie or TV footage when characters are watching TV (especially in content set during the CRT era. I guess they think kids that have never seen a VHS can't tell the difference between low bitrate YouTube and video cassette).

 

Old news clips which are sourced from YouTube pop up in a lot of big movies too.