Yeah. I know.Quoting Dead & Messed Up (view post)
Their challenge going forward is this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/22/b...hina-mpaa.html
So if we pair that with a critical drubbing and online backlash... I thought maybe somebody at Warners would be smart enough to pause and go, "Hmmm..."
Instead of releasing a trailer that looks like "Suicide Squad: Good Guys Edition."
Considering they were able to sell that piece of rubbish on some classic music trailers, why on Earth would they back down from the model? You're argument makes no sense. I'm amazed SS made any money after week one, but it sure as hell appealed to some people, and you're basically saying that didn't happen. It did. Why the hell wouldn't they continue to do what they do?
You guys are making the argument that "well, every trailer does that now, so..." Which... uh. Okay.
I'm saying it's a bad ad, partially on the basis that they're repeating a motif from a bad movie. (You know how too many car commercials feature a silver-gray sedan driving along a coastal highway, accompanied by chamber music and a baritone voiceover? Those are also bad ads. Point being: If you're doing the same thing everybody else is doing, you're doing something wrong. "That's the way everybody does it" is a terrible justification in advertising.)
They're riding on the power of the IP --- because their isn't anything in this trailer that's compelling outside the named superheroes and "Justice League." Remove the larger context, and this looks another generic, shit CGI movie.
Eventually, I think they'll hit rock bottom and have their own little "Amazing Spider-man 2" epiphany. Given that the ticket sales you guys are touting as proof-of-concept fell or were flat last year, they might have a problem sooner rather than later.
PS: Go back and re-watch the "Spider-man: Homecoming" trailer. It's more traditional, but it gives the audience a better indication of what the movie is like, and it doesn't pump classic rock to hold up the visuals.
Whaaaa? Where did you get that from?
Last edited by Irish; 03-25-2017 at 09:57 PM.
In fairness, I was the only one who argued that it's a common way to trailer it up; Skitch pointed out that this model specifically worked for Suicide Squad, so it makes sense that they'd do the same thing here. While all three of us might've disliked Suicide Squad, the bigger question is whether or not casual audiences felt like they got duped by the bombastic marketing roller coaster. (My guess is most simply won't remember Suicide Squad well enough to have it impact their take on Justice League: So Dang Dark).
If you think it's a crummy trailer, that's cool (the movie looks like a muddier, po-faced Avengers). I just think there's a completely defensible (and possibly wise) reason for them making the choice they made. And given that the Comic-Con trailer from last year set Justice League to The White Stripes' "Icky Thump," they clearly like the reactions they get from slipping a little Jack White into their Bat Black.
Going forward, though, the bigger issue is gonna be how people react to Wonder Woman, since that leads directly into JL, and the vibes from that will be much more impactful than one of four trailers.
In regards to general audience reaction to Suicide Squad, as opposed to more informed or "film buff" audiences, the #1 movie most people pointed out to me (again, from non-film buffs, mind you) that I "left off" my end of year best of list from 2016 was Suicide Squad, for what that matters. So yeah, we all thought it was garbage, but I think the general masses were honestly more than okay with it, and liked it enough to consider it among their favorites of the year (my screening, for instance, received a standing ovation, if you can fucking believe that shit.) Not to mention that the SS versions of The Joker and Harley Quinn are clearly this year's go-to cosplay in the convention circuit, at least from what I've seen at the conventions I've been to this year so far, though I suppose that can have more to do with an appreciation for the designs and the characters than it does an appreciation for the actual movie.
And no one is saying "everyone does it now so its okay". Im saying its a trend that has been successful. Whether it appeals to you specifically as someone who didnt like the previous outcomes is irrelevant. I feel like this is silly having to explain.
This was my point? (albeit in a roundabout way.) If you or I could spot that as a potential weakness, surely somebody at Warners has too. It seems likely this campaign is less grand strategy and more corporate inertia.
I think you're overestimating the Comic Con crowd. There's a reason why studios pulled back on that show, and besides, domestic reaction to these movies has been tepid at best.
My sense is that WW will get lost in all the summer releases, outside urgent hot takes from earnest writers at MTV and Teen Vogue. (I'm not sure there's a big crossover audience here, anyways.) If there was a certain amount of blockbuster fatigue last year, it'll be worse this year because there's more movies on the schedule.
On top of your bigger question, I'm wondering what happens to these movies when they have to compete with each other one-on-one, eg: Atomic Blonde and Dark Tower debut the same weekend. So what happens when a Captain America movie goes up against a Fast and Furious movie?
If JL benefits from anything, it will benefit from having US theaters all to itself over Thanksgiving weekend.
PS: I get being excited for a JL movie, but this is still a terrible trailer and I'd rather watch reruns of the JLU cartoon than this, which, when you think about it, is really pretty sad.
PPS: "Amazing Spider-man 2" made $700MM gross worldwide. Get it? Bad metric. Sony knew when to cut their perceived losses; Warners seems oblivious. They've essentially made "ASM2" twice. I think that'll come back on them. Eventually.
Last edited by Irish; 03-25-2017 at 11:46 PM.
At least from what we've seen so far, whenever this happens, one of them moves. This happened when both Captain America and Batman v Superman were for a time scheduled for the same weekend, and BvS got shuffled to March. And on a slightly smaller scale, the same happened with the new Alien and Life, both of which were scheduled for May releases at one point, before Life decided to move ahead of schedule to avoid conflict.
All 6 studios have flooded the market with so many genre movies that eventually there won't be any room to move.
This already happened, to a degree, which is why Cloverfield Lane and Deadpool debuted when they did. This year, both Marvel and DC debut movies in November. Next year, it'll be even more crowded.
So I'm curious how they'll compete directly against other movies with the same rough attributes and the same media footprint (my gut is ... they won't, and all these tentpoles will tip over).
I was referring to the Comic-Con trailer's reaction online (versus its reaction in the hall). Maybe that wasn't clear on my part.
Possibly. I'm interested in what Patty J. does with the first real big female superhero feature (basically, if she can escape the suck gravity).
Why be sad? DCAU is fucking on-point. My favorite Batman film is probably still Mask of the Phantasm.
The trick there is that Amazing Dos made markedly less than its originator ($750 vs. $700 mil). I suspect Sony was looking at film-to-film decrease and saying, "Uh-oh." That hasn't happened yet with DC.
It depresses me because they never seem to know what they have.
Ten, twenty years ago a half dozen guys and a handful of stringers produced a better take on the same material, for a fraction of the cost.
Today, they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars and burning thousands of manhours to produce shittier work.
Huh? They're not direct sequels, but "Suicide Squad" generated $128MM less worldwide gross than "BvS." To your earlier point about lead-ins (WW > JL), that's a potential problem.
(Anyway, I don't think anyone would blink so much at a $50MM drop. I mean, for comparison, that's already happened with the Marvel movies; "Ultron" made significantly less money than "Avengers".)
Also, meant to agree with this part. I'm very curious how this will play and whether audiences will take to Gal Gadot.
My fear is that everything around the movie will become overly politicized, and even if the movie sucks, critics will treat it with kid gloves. ("Ghostbusters" still has a "certified fresh" ranking on RT, after all.)
I dunno, Wonder Woman and Gal Gadot's portrayal of her was by far the most praised aspect of BvS, even by its most fervent haters. So I think audiences have already taken to her in the role, and at this point it's just a matter of whether or not her stand-alone movie will deliver the goods as well. I remain hopeful, though I'm admittedly expecting another train wreck of a movie. Just, if it must be a train wreck, I'd prefer an enjoyable one, like BvS, as opposed to the miserable variety, like we got with SS.
Really hope the movie doesn't get politicized to that point, though. That was already obnoxious enough with that movie.
One thing I'll give the DCU - it inspires more heated discussion than the MCU does.
Last 10 Movies Seen
(90+ = canonical, 80-89 = brilliant, 70-79 = strongly recommended, 60-69 = good, 50-59 = mixed, 40-49 = below average with some good points, 30-39 = poor, 20-29 = bad, 10-19 = terrible, 0-9 = soul-crushingly inept in every way)
Run (2020) 64
The Whistlers (2019) 55
Pawn (2020) 62
Matilda (1996) 37
The Town that Dreaded Sundown (1976) 61
Moby Dick (2011) 50
Soul (2020) 64
Heroic Duo (2003) 55
A Moment of Romance (1990) 61
As Tears Go By (1988) 65
Stuff at Letterboxd
Listening Habits at LastFM
I have to admit, I sometimes wonder if it's better for this very reason.
Movie Theater Diary
I wonder if the DCEU path they've set out will eventually justify BvS. Bonkers, I know, but what if the several picture arc makes everyone rethink BvS? Not saying people will come back and say its a masterpiece or something (nor am I claiming it is such), just go "Oh. Okay. Well now it makes sense why they did ABC in BvS. I rescind my label of it being terrible."
Unlikely. Dare to dream. lol
If I recall, there were two huge events scheduled the weekend Ultron came out. One of them was an MMA fight. They other escapes me. But that was one of the reasons why it didn't perform as good as Avengers.
This would be nice. I can maybe see us going back and not hating so much of the plot tic-tac-toe with the Flash and Parademon flash-forwards if there's meaningful payoff in later entries (although that's really just information-slotting and not a mark of good storytelling - Snyder saying, "See, I had a plan" when the plan can still sorta suck).
There's something bizarre about Snyder's best film still being the energetic Dawn of the Dead remake. At the time, it felt like a promising warm-up, but now it's the only film of his that has succeeds at most of what it's attempting. Deft humor, clear arcs, stylistic variability. The hell.
One thing I've been wondering lately is if children's entertainment in some ways requires a more mature and serious understanding of storytelling, because a children's story doesn't have the escape hatch of convolution or complexity. Thing is, if you can make a story sufficiently busy, you can possibly convince an adult audience that they've watched something thoughtful or mature or ambiguous (when the film might actually be about nothing at all).
[Not intentionally trick - a lot of screenwriters probably really do think that a more aggressively "plotty" movie is a more sophisticated one, because look at all these plates we have to spin.]
But with animation for children, you really do have to be clear about character wants/fears/perspectives. You can't hide behind convoluted reveals or too-severe twists. So, when Dini/Timm etc. produce "Heart of Ice," they know that every scene with Freeze needs to be about his desire to save his wife. But when Terrio/Goyer reposition Lex's plan as a sort of socio-political mystery, we as an audience are collectively tapping our feet, waiting for Lex's motivations to clarify so we can understand why he wants these two guys to fight, because that's when we can start caring about his choices.
Every time I feel the urge to defend him, I remember Sucker Punch and how it was (supposedly) entirely his brain child.
Then I just shut my mouth and back quietly out, eyes pointed at the floor.
Somedays I want to watch the film... and then I don't and feel equally fulfilled.
Hope and shame, in that order.
I maintain that Sucker Punch was legitimately great.
Posting Permissions
forum
Reply With Quote