The DC Studios co-chief admits that the executive role wasn’t quite right for him and looks forward to returning to filmmaking full time.
The DC Studios co-chief admits that the executive role wasn’t quite right for him and looks forward to returning to filmmaking full time.
Suicide Squad reboot was solid. Which led directly to Peacemaker, which is very good. Creature Commandos was good. Superman reboot was good. Peacemakers S2 was good. Lanterns was good and finally doing something with Lantern lore. Clayface is getting good early reviews too. Supergirl got mid reviews, but I generally see people say it was decent with poor execution.
That is a solid slate of media. With Superman 2 and Batman projects being in the works.
You thinking that they’re good doesn’t matter when they clearly did not do well enough to justify keeping Gunn. They fired him.
Them being actually good is what made them good. DCU had active and regular good buzz after a decade plus of being a joke.
Its disingenuous to see the studio get bought out by the infamously ultra conservative Ellison family who are purchasing and censoring all forms of media they can and just go ‘clearly did not do well enough.’
And if we’re being persnickety, ‘fired’ is incorrect. Still bad imo, but not the same. But ‘X happened, therefore it must have been justified financially’ is baloney. Especially since the guy they replaced him with has a policy of making things his ‘grandmother would like’, famously a top demo for superhero media.
Also lets look at the usual Enshittification process when mergers like this happen. It happened when Warner was sold to Discovery and now Paramount. This is their MO.
This is a bullshit statement. You can’t say that they’re good just because you say so.
Even if that is true, it hasn’t made money.
I don’t like them either but It’s not difficult to find the numbers. It didn’t do well.
He was fired. He wasn’t even given time to see Superman through.
Again, the numbers are easy to find. And we don’t know what the additional costs of making these movies are, usually we don’t see numbers for marketing and other expenses. A move can’t just make a little bit of profit to be sustainable and only one of the three Gunn movies has made back its budget. I’m not sure what the point of taking about his replacement is? I mean I don’t like that ideology but it’s Gunn that’s failed here.
I mean sure, but my argument was about Gunn, not how much worse it’s probably going to get with Skydance.
Sorry bro. “Because Money” is lame reasoning. Movies make money but not ‘enough’ money, therefore they are ‘failures’. Yawn.