Lora Kennedy, Head of Casting at Warner Bros., is leaving the company after working there for nearly 20 years. During her time there she helped cast Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and Henry Cavill as Superman. She also oversaw casting for Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy, as well as Suicide Squad.
Warner Bros. President of Production, Courtenay Valenti, announced the news today via an internal memo that Deadline obtained. You can read it in full below.
Dear All:
I wanted to let you know that Lora Kennedy, who has headed up our casting team for almost 20 years and been an integral part of the Warner Bros. Pictures family, will be leaving her post in the coming weeks. As she segues into new creative ventures, we look forward to continuing to work with her.
Lora has worked on so many of our iconic films, her work reads like a catalog of Warner Bros.’ greatest hits. She personally handled the casting for Syriana, The Town, Argo (for which she won an Artios Award and a SAG Award for best ensemble cast), Cloud Atlas, Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Wonder Woman and Justice League.
As the head of our casting department, she also oversaw the casting of such films as the Harry Potter films, the Dark Knight trilogy, Inception, the Sherlock Holmesmovies, The Hangover trilogy, Gravity, The Departed, Mad Max: Fury Road, Suicide Squad, the first two Fantastic Beasts films and Ready Player One as well as the upcoming Ocean’s 8, Aquaman and Goldfinch. And those are just the highlights.
Her groundbreaking work in casting has been widely recognized by her peers—Lora received the Artios Lifetime Achievement Award in 2012—and by the industry at large for her key role in forming the casting branch of the Academy, for which she now serves as a Governor.
On a personal note, Lora and I have worked together for more than 20 years, and I’ve admired her talent and valued her partnership on so many films. Our films are all the better because of Lora’s work on them.
While I will miss her in our daily staff meetings, I look forward to benefitting from her amazing taste on the movies on which we will work together going forward.
Please join me in wishing Lora all the best as she starts her next chapter.
This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com
140 comments
Jesse Hernandez
Oh man.... I mean what does that mean now... we’re getting shit actors to play our characters now ?. I doubt but I enjoyed Keaton Gadot Cavill are really good castings.
Jesse Hernandez
Well movie is subjective but I think Affleck and Cavill did a good job in BvS... really don’t care about the Razzies, some of the decision making up in there is questionable, I saw what they tried doing with Eisenberg in this movie but I thought he was the weak point of the movie but Cavill acting like a Superman that’s not acting depressed but rather conflicted, I thought he did a good job & Affleck gave us a grizzled 20 year in service Batman acting like a broken man with no more playing around... I believe he did an amazing job
DudeofSteel1Million
Now that you're back (how's the baby?), what do you make of the financial results of Solo?
DudeofSteel1Million
Long nights? Are you handy with a nappy yet? I was quite the diaper changer when my youngest sibling was a baby, so I know what that's like.
I agree with you that Disney is indeed wearing out the brand of Star Wars and that there is fatigue. I also agree that nobody wanted a Solo movie either (myself included). But, personal opinions on the last few Star Wars movies aside (you already know I've hated them all), I do think that some of the blame being on the actual movies themselves can't be ignored.
TLJ was indeed a divisive movie and more than just your run of the mill vocal internet trolls did not care for it. I saw Solo opening night - not only was the theater not even close to being HALF-FULL (For a STAR WARS MOVIE opening night on a big IMAX screen), but the people sitting to my right and left were chatting about how much they hated The Last Jedi and hoped this one would be better. Two of them on my left were college-aged and the family on my right ranged from senior citizen to child-aged. Now I'm not saying they represent the majority or anything, but it's still telling that the outreach of TLJ's negativity stretches beyond the internet and into the casual arena.
And though projections are proving to be more and more inaccurate with each passing big movie, the fact that the movie was projected to open as high as 170 million and it couldn't even make half of that should be cause for alarm.
As for my personal opinion, it probably won't surprise you that I didn't care for Solo. At all. It was boring, ridiculous, cringeworthy, and the humor fell flat in almost every instance (I think I grinned maybe twice at maximum throughout the entire thing). There were times when I thought Alden had a tinge of a young Harrison in his performance, but most of the time, he wasn't good.
As for the "cameo" (I assume you know who it is), it's kinda sad that they're now resorting to using that as a means to get people excited for Star Wars now.
BatfleckRules
Pretending that TLJ wasn’t a divisive movie just because it has a high RT score is nonsense.
The hate is real. Ppl bashing Kathleen Kennedy ALL over youtube right now. It’s not even that a lot of these fans think TLJ was a bad movie, from what I can, most are just upset with the state of the universe after the events that transpired in TLJ took place.
Really, I think what it boils down to is the world just wasn’t ready for the death of Luke Skywalker just yet lol.
I fall into that camp, his death was a huge buzzkill for me and I have a hard time enjoying TLJ because of it.
DudeofSteel1Million
It's not just Luke's death that has really gotten on audiences' nerves, though that IS a big deal for sure.
It's the entire state of Star Wars in of itself. And as controversial as it is, the politics of it cannot be ignored. YES, people ARE annoyed by the blatant pandering agendas they're trying to fulfill.
DudeofSteel1Million
No, it specifically is NOT like Terminator or Alien because those films had logical justifications for their female characters to act, say and do what they did in their respective films. I mean, you already know my position on Rey, so you might want to double think about re-opening this can of worms lest we get into another longwinded circular debate about it.
DudeofSteel1Million
There's plenty of rhyme and reason to it and plenty of others have echoed my sentiments as well in that regard. You just don't agree because you happen to like the movies, but that doesn't make my position "indefensible." And the fact that my position triggers you so much that you're even butting into a conversation that didn't involve you shows that you're just too mad to see that.
LOL! No, I'm sorry man... Just no.
DudeofSteel1Million
"Flimsy argument" is another way of stating that you don't agree on the merit that it doesn't fit with your viewpoint. We argued about this in circles and neither of us came to a mutual agreement on any of it, which goes to show that whereas you find my argument "flimsy," I found the same in yours. And no, it still doesn't technically involve you since you obviously had no inclination to respond or reason to until after I'm guessing you got bored waiting for a response on our box office conversation.
"A Mary Sue is an idealized version of the STORYTELLER serving as an empowerment vehicle for said storyteller. So unless JJ Abrams, Lawrence Kasdan, and Rian Johnson view themselves as nubile young women (it is 2018, I guess) then Rey by very definition is not a "Mary Sue"." LOL!!! What? See, this is another strange excuse you reach for to justify something you like. A Mary Sue doesn't have to be an empowerment vehicle FOR the storyteller. While it generally can be and its origins reach back to an author actually using it as wish fulfillment, that is not the sole purpose or cause of a Mary Sue. A Mary Sue in general describes the overtly perfect character with generally too little flaws to be believable to the story.
And even still, you are forgetting that though Abrams, Kasdan and Johnson are the storytellers, they are working under the mandates of a female producer who wears shirts like "The Force is female." So don't act like it's solely reliant on the whims of the males.
DudeofSteel1Million
Correction: It doesn't jive with "your logic," which is not the same as normal logic since you've already gone out of your way to act as a missionary for these new films. You HAVE gone in circles - I mean, you're doing it again right now. And you're doing it on the basis that I, again, criticized Rey and it triggered you to rehash the same exact arguments that we had before. We never agreed to disagree - true. But that's more akin to you stubbornly clinging to your opinion as fact as opposed to engaging in a healthy debate of opposing viewpoints. Hence why you equate the Mary Sue angle as solely being epitomized by Max Landis. And while it's true that he snowballed the terminology for Rey specifically, it's found its way into prime criticisms for her character by many people who probably don't even know or give a crap who Landis even is. And hell, I don't even like Landis really and 90% of the time I don't even agree with him anyways, so calling Rey a "Mary Sue" is does not reflect on that one man's opinion.
Again, a Mary Sue is not solely dependent upon the wish fulfillment of the writer directly inserting his/herself into the main character. And just for context's sake, in many ways Han Solo in the new Solo movie exhibits "Gary Stu" traits in a similar vein as well for similar purposes as Rey. It's not as overt, but it's there.
Try and try as you might, I never bought into any of your justifications for why Rey wasn't a Mary Sue, need I remind you. And one of the key reasonings is that none of what you cited for Rey is actually really a "flaw" because if anything, it only endears her character further to those surrounding her. Her flaws essentially can be summed up to be that she's naive, kind, and she wants to do the right thing - all of which aren't even "flaws." The ONLY real character-based problem she has is she seeks personal validation by finding out or waiting for her parents to try to define herself. But once it's revealed that they were literally nothing of value, then Rey no longer has a single definable problem that she needs to overcome. And if anything, it wasn't anything to overcome ANYWAYS since everyone she tried to latch on to ended up either disappointing her by being an a-hole that she didn't need at all or just dying after 5 minutes of interaction. Even Daisy Ridley said she doesn't believe Rey "needs flaws", hence why her character is this near-perfect angel, blessed by the Force itself to be the queen of the Jedi that trumps even the previous "Chosen One" who underwent 10+ years of intensive training to be one of the best.
1. No, because she never actually struggles with any of it. She realizes she has the power and masters it without any help. 2. Umm... She kicked the crap out of Kylo Ren her first try holding a lightsaber. For comparison's sake, Vader beat the snot out of Luke his first try in a duel - and this is AFTER he went through intensive training. 3. Is it? She beat him after all, did she not? And they even acknowledge that in TLJ when Snoke mocks Kylo for being bested by a "girl who had never held a lightsaber before." And when they had a semi-rematch trying to grab Anakin's lightsaber, though the handle broke in half, Ren got knocked out and Rey stayed conscious to get away. 4. What? That she's just naturally good at what she does because she was chosen by the Force to balance things out? That's pretty much the basis of what a Mary Sue is. She's perfect because... The Force. It also negates the point of any training at all if raw talent is all you need to be a Jedi goddess. Her equal, Kylo, had to go through rigorous trials and training to be what he is and yet Rey gets one lesson (not even) and she's already equal to him and the only explanation for that is that the Force made it that way.
Yeah... No.
And in contrast, all these questions you presented have to be excused in a manner that suits your viewpoint for it to have any credibility. And since we've been through this exercise before, I already know pretty much what you're going to say since this same debate went on for weeks last time. But I guess you're suffering from boredom and want to have another merry-go-round again. I'll indulge you a little, but I'm not going to play time-loop.
DudeofSteel1Million
Not your type of logic though, dude. I defend the DCEU films because I feel they're worth defending too. But unlike you, I'm not blind to the fact that many people just don't like them. Whether I feel they dislike them for the wrong reasons is irrelevant. I could go on all day about how people missed the point of the "Martha" scene. Doesn't change the fact that people didn't like it. You could go on all day about how Snoke never had to be anything more than what he was, too, or that Rey isn't a Mary Sue. Doesn't change the fact that many were pissed about what happened to him or that people DO think Rey is a Mary Sue. The criticism doesn't make sense "to you," That doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. Because if it was all nonsense, there wouldn't be so many who hated it. And that you cannot deny.
LOL What? Flirtation with the Dark Side? How? Because of one scene where she was drawn to a dark cave? Give me a break. She's altruistic and inherently good 99.9% of the time and yes, she DOES want to do the right thing. Even Daisy Ridley said that. That's ALL she wants to do and that is one of her many Mary Sue traits.
Luke's altruism makes sense based upon what we know about him as a character. We've seen WHY he's altruistic, we know WHY he's good, we know WHY he's naive, but we also learn where his foibles come from as well and we see his flaws. Rey is just this godly creature who was inherently good from the start. She has a crappy life, parents who were apparently shitheads, and lives under the thumb of a greedy scrap seller, yet she's kind, thoughtful, powerful, and everyone she meets takes either an instant liking to her or is impressed/respected by her. She's not "flawed." She's not "relatable." She's a "Mary Sue."
1. God.... You're not helping your claim that Rey isn't a Mary Sue when she gains her power by feeding off Kylo probing her mind when she had NO TRAINING or any knowledge/setup to be able to resist mind attacks of that magnitude. 2. A. Luke was already exposed to tapping into the Force by Ben. Albeit a brief training session, but a taught skill nonetheless factoring into his already raw talent being the son of the Chosen One. B. Luke was already a fine pilot in of itself and X-Wing piloting wasn't much different than flying T-16's. C. Luke was GUIDED by Ben while doing so. He didn't suddenly get the idea to use the Force without any aid. Ben told him to trust his feelings and stop using the targeting computer. Fighting with a staff and a lightsaber are two very different things first of all. With a blunt instrument, there is forceful weight being placed behind strikes because the object itself has that weight attached, but a lightsaber is literally like fighting with a flashlight whereas the handle is the only physical weight being wielded. Yet Rey swings it around like a pro and beats up the much more experienced burgeoning Sith/Dark Jedi first try. And where did Rey even get her fighting skills from? Surely that's something to be acquired, yet she's established as living on her own, isolated from everyone. Who taught her? When? Why? Something to be mentioned to establish her proficiency, right? Another thing to add to beef up her backstory, no? But there's nothing. Just like 90% of her other skills. Another Mary Sue trait pre-established into her character before we even get to know her. As for the age-old "Kylo was wounded" excuse, it never works. You tried it before and trying to use it again won't change that factor. If Kylo was "so wounded" that he couldn't fight right, why was he wasting his time toying with Finn? Why is he wasting his time indulging Rey when the planet is in danger of being destroyed? Why is there not a single hint that the blaster shot is actually inhibiting his abilities, when he shows that the pain is just feeding his Dark Side energies by hitting it? And why didn't they address this factor in The Last Jedi if it was so important? The answer is: It wasn't. 3. Yeah.. Actually. What a Mary Sue. Another trait of Mary Sues is how their plot armor pops up in convenient situations for their benefit. Despite being "evenly matched", who, by the plot's convenience, ends up drawing the better luck conveniently off-screen? And as for the confirmation of their equivalence, again, Rey already humiliated Kylo Ren having never held a lightsaber in her life, which Snoke ALSO directly stated. 4. LOL. Again with the mind probe excuse. Being "mind-raped" by the Force is not the same as being TAUGHT how to use it. It's another Mary Sue trait in that Rey was able to turn one of Kylo's most powerful abilities against him by suddenly using the Force all on her own. LOL!!!! Dude, now you're really pushing it. "Crash-course training". LMAO! Trying to say Luke had "no training" now too. Oh, boy...
I'm sorry, man. But this is flat out ridiculous. This is pretty much exactly the same debate we had before and I'm not in the mood to rehash that if there's nothing new to be offered.
You can Chalk that up to "cowardice" or whatever internet-tough-guy jargon you may want to use, but what's the point of re-answering that which I already answered, regardless of whether you personally felt it was not satisfactory?
DudeofSteel1Million
No, they're not. And you can't say that any more than I can say I believe the DCEU films are objectively better produced than the criticism conveys. That is just a fact of life. You may like the new Star Wars films - I freaking hate them. But obviously, people like you like them and I don't deny that. You may hate the DCEU films - I freaking love them (save Justice League). But obviously, people like you hate them and I don't deny that.
You can say that all you want, but that's simply YOU putting your perspective on Batman when he's had over 75 years of history that has varied, not the least of which is showing when he was first created KILLING people. And also in that history is the STILL much beloved Tim Burton films that has Batman.... you guessed it... killing people. And even though he had a staunch line drawn in the sand in the Nolan films against the notion of execution, he still ends up killing in that as well. So again, it all comes down to perspective and interpretation. In the end, Batman is still a fictional character that has been interpreted in a million different ways and some people like one way whereas others don't. Similar situation with Luke. You loved it - I thought it destroyed EVERYTHING that made Luke great.
As for Snyder's explanation, there are two ways to look at it. One way is in response to how Batman should never kill, and yet people don't have a problem with him doing stuff like letting Ra's Al Ghul die, even if not by his hand, so a death by circumstance. The other is in regards to Batman not giving two hoots about the collateral damage caused regardless of whether it destroys lives. And he even justifies that stance in the movie ("Criminals are like weeds. Pull one up, another grows in its place.").
I am fully comfortable with admitting the known fact that MORE people hate the DCEU than they hate the new Star Wars films. But that's NOT the point. The point is that regardless of how you or I feel, there are differing viewpoints out there that showcase that a vast many people did not like the direction of either which exposes a problem. While I may revel in the deconstruction to reconstruct format of seeing my favorite heroes portrayed, others just wanted to see the heroes in all their glory. Just like while you may revel in seeing Luke deconstructed, others did not want to see their hero torn down like that.
You can't call it "bullshit" any more than I can call the criticisms of the DCEU "bullshit." I love the "Save Martha" moment and I personally think a lot of people who hated it "didn't get it." I DO think very much that a lot of people MAKE UP problems that the movie doesn't have BIG TIME. The notion that Batman became allies with Superman just because their "moms have the same name" is a problem "people make up" because they take the scene out of context of what it actually does. That's MY perspective. Doesn't change the fact that many people thought it was stupid and I could go in merry-go-round circles arguing with people like you on its merits, but we'd never get anywhere because you couldn't change my mind on it any more than I could change yours. Same with Star Wars. Like Rey being a Mary Sue or the pointlessness of the Canto Bight stuff or Snoke's anticlimatic offing or Luke's character destruction. I find that all truly bothersome as do many other people. And you can argue against that, but you can't CHANGE the perspective regardless of how it made you feel.
DudeofSteel1Million
The Knightmare scene has footing due to its relevance to Bruce's current mental state and further motivation for him to pursue his plan to hunt Superman. It is the culmination of his worst fears that Superman represents while also acting as the "just a feeling" he has later on when he decides to dedicate the rest of his life to finding the other metahumans after Superman's death. How is that NOT serving a purpose?
Umm... How is Finch discovering the jar of urine not indicative of her impending doom? She said that exact thing to Lex and now he's not present at the hearing. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Superman leaving the goons alone I also already explained in regards to how he viewed Batman as the primary suspect in the incident. Technically, the goons didn't do anything suspicious BEFORE they were ambushed by Batman. Why wouldn't Batman place a tracker on the truck? It's a contingency plan in case he loses it - and it ended up working because he DID end up losing the truck due to Superman's interference.
"I can ask for an explanation to these issues, and I won't get any answers." Except that you already did that and I gave you answers. They weren't to your liking, but I still gave them to you.
In the same way, I've asked you numerous times for answers on the plot holes, character inconsistencies and leaps in logic from VII and VIII and though you gave me "answers," they came off as sorry excuses and filling in the gaps that both JJ and Rian couldn't do themselves. The writing is far beyond not substantiated. There is NO attention to detail which is half the reason the films suck.
Wrong. TLJ and TFA can be called objectively horrendous movies for their lapses in logic in any way you can say the DCEU films are objectively awful or have problems. Plenty of people have pointed them out. It wasn't JUST about bad or uninteresting characters. The logic fails in several ways in just as many instances as you fault the DCEU.
DudeofSteel1Million
See, that's just an example of you, again, letting your own personal vendetta drive your opinions. I gave you answers and you say there aren't answers. The very fact that I gave them to you despite what your opinion on them was goes to show that there are indeed "Answers" in the same way you claim there are answers for TLJ and TFA.
"Out of thin air?" For them to come out of thin air would require me to be the only one who said them. Except for the fact that I didn't and many others have echoed my sentiments. Like Luke leaving a map - it's not like I "invented" that criticism. But that wasn't even one of my bigger ones any way. As for the map, if Luke never wanted to be found, you'd think he'd at the very least erase R2's memory bank so that he couldn't conveniently wake up when the other piece of the map was found to lead others to his location...
Again, you keep saying that and yet I already told you it had bearing on its plot. And even then, using your own logic, Canto Bight could be deemed as having 0% relevance based on the fact that A) its side quest was pointless and was mere "sequel bait" and B) the character motivations/introductions that stemmed from it made no sense and took huge leaps in logic.
Once again, this all feels like very familiar territory and as I said to you before, I'm not interested in rehashing our previous near-month-long debate as neither of us agree with each other on any of these points and we'll go round and round in merry-go-round fashion until someone outright gives up on trying to obtain "the last word."
DudeofSteel1Million
Again, the Knightmare scene was relevant due to the showcasing of what Batman's worst fears were coming to pass in regards to how he viewed Superman. It served the double purpose of also setting up his gut-feeling of finding the other metahumans to prepare for the imminent threat that would be represented in JL. The Martha scene SHOULD be self-explanatory in that it showcased Batman realizing Superman's humanity through the fact that he has a human mother that he can associate with his own. It also serves as the inciting incident for Batman to be made aware that the roles have been reversed and that he was becoming the same killer that deprived an innocent boy of his mother. There's not really a "hot take" on the subject matter that hasn't been explained already - it just so happens to not be to your liking since you already stubbornly hate the movie.
Doesn't matter if R2's data was incomplete. The fact that he was even allowed to keep at it all would be indicative that Luke possibly wanted to be found. We already know that erasing a droid's memory is possible. We've already seen that C-3PO suffered that fate at the end of ROTS. So why wouldn't Luke do it to R2 if he wanted to find the most "unfindable" spot in the galaxy where he couldn't be bothered? Makes absolutely NO SENSE and the excuse that he just thought it wouldn't matter in the longrun is ludicrous - especially for a forward-thinking Jedi.
Han's dialogue? Please. It was all speculation. He didn't KNOW. That was the point. Nobody knew. But yet Luke still left R2 with a piece of a map regardless. And just because Abrams and Johnson compromised on the ending (which, BTW, how do you know they weren't just blowing smoke) doesn't mean the movies were planned out. How might you explain this little beauty? http://www.denofgeek.com/us...
Canto Bight WAS pointless. Not necessarily because it wasn't integrated into the ham-fisted retarded excuse for a "plot", but because the actual PURPOSE of the scene meant complete and utter NONSENSE. For instance, it's apparently MORE IMPORTANT for the assholes to waste their time trashing the casino and freeing the poor animals than it is to save the slaves because it'll "make them hurt" - the people who got rich off of selling weapons to the First Order. Yet who is going to be punished for the damage? You think the rich greedy people are going to be the ones with the mop and broom? Or do you think the poor slaves are going to be the ones to feel the crack of the whips at their backs for the destruction Finn and Rose caused? Like I said: NONSENSE.
"Provided a sense of dynamism?" Oh, please. If the slowburn "out of fuel" dumb chase wasn't such a bore, you wouldn't NEED that (again, why can't the First Order send ships AHEAD of the Resistance ships, using hyperspeed to ambush them?).
As for the "character development," it's absolute bollocks. Finn needing to learn to be a "hero" again is ridiculous considering that he already learned this lesson in TFA (BAHAHA!!! Mentioning Phasma is just beyond laughable). And lastly, the "plan?" It's not just that the plan going to the dumpster made the entire sequence pointless, it's the INHERENT WRITING OUTSIDE THE FILM THAT MADE IT POINTLESS. Like why the hell is it necessary to go to Canto Bight in the first place? Because that purple-haired doofus excuse for a leader for some reason wouldn't tell anyone her plan, inciting Poe to make up his own. So that made the entire reason to execute such a stupid plan "pointless."
That is pretty much the definition of having the last word, dude. lol Or at least the general excuse used to having the last word. If it wasn't, then you wouldn't be bringing up a topic we've already discussed before where you stated the same thing and you heard my response to it (in that it was ridiculous, pointless, stupid, nonsensical, etc). Which means that the only reason for you to bring it up again is to just have the last word on the matter.
DudeofSteel1Million
And that's where you kinda do prove you do care about either of those things because that is the fundamental principle of what you just said. It's an ego trip in the end - to be the last one who gets in the last retort. But the thing is that it's not really a good debate if you just tire out your sparring partner by hitting them with repetition as opposed to offering an alternative viewpoint that changes their perspective.
In the end, most online debaters whether they want to admit it or not do care about having the last word for precisely the reasons you stated - someone says something you disagree with, you tell them why. Then if they come back with why they disagree with what you disagree with, you tell them why you disagree with what they disagreed with what you disagreed with and the cycle continues.
Now if you were honest, you'd at least concede to that.
DudeofSteel1Million
But that in turn leads to a bid for the last word. You're not comfortable leaving things until you get your say in just about every last argument, with few exceptions.
That's the thing though - Not only did you already address what you yourself brought up (not me), but we went around in circles about it to the point where even you tired of the debate. Like I said, I just don't see the point unless there's something new to address.
BatfleckRules
Yeah i’m not sure if that backlash had any impact on the direction of ROTJ or not never looked into it always just assumed George Lucas gave us his 3 part vision with little studio interference. But I think ROTJ, kinda fixed ESB for a lot of ppl.
This is entirely possible for Ep9 and 8 except that they may be going in an entirely different direction from where they initially saw themselves going as Disney sees Star Wars as a long term cash cow and i’m sure they’re pretty worried after Solo and the huge youtube backlash to the direction they’ve steered SW into. All the main cast is gone, personally, I think it was too soon to kill them and people don’t love the new cast as much.
I’d be surprised if Disney pulls themselves out of this grave and delivers something in Ep9 that makes me forgive ep8 but you never know. I think they’re firing Kathleen Kennedy so that’s awesome no more SJW forced diversity crap. That’s a start.
BatfleckRules
Yeah Solo bombs, you’ve literally got youtube lit up with fans expressing their disappointment with the direction Disney has taken the franchise.
There was no backlash like this during TFA. And don’t be a social justice warrior, calling people racists because they don’t want liberal political agendas in their films is not racist. That sort of ultra sensitive liberal mentality is why America is such a mess right now and people are so divided. Liberals get wound up over nothing and seem to forget what actual racism is.
But, Kathleen Kennedy will be fired. You’ll see Disney bow to the fans.
They need to if they want Star Wars to be profitable for years to come. Star Wars hype is largely based on nostalgia. Once the OT characters are all gone I think they’re fucked personally.
Not to say the films will be bad or anything but I just see a steep drop off in the profit Star Wars films will make if they don’t many ties to the original films anymore.
A lot of fans bitch saying they wish Star Wars would branch out and introduce new characters aside from skywalker bloodline but i’ve always disagreed. As soon as they do that I see Star Wars’ popularity fading as nostalgia is so important to SW fans.
They’re not gonna be able to successfully milk star wars the way they do with Disney.
I think one of the main reasons for Ep7 and Ep8 making a lot of money was due to the inclusion of Hamill, Ford and Carrie.
Now that they’re all gone, yikes, look out. Also didn’t help that a large percentage of fans disliked TLJ.
Solo is a good indication of how doomed Disney SW is. Don’t listen to Wall Street Journal they’re corporate media and have a big interest in sugarcoating the reality of Disney’s shit sandwhich’s.
BatfleckRules
Ep7 had Ford and Carrie Ep8 had Hamill and Carrie
Ep9 was CLEARLY divisive amongst fans (RT fan score, youtube backlash, low blu ray sales)
Solo bombed. Make up all the excuses you want, but this is Star Wars we’re talking about here... it’s my normal.
In my opinion, Disney didn’t leave themselves with anything intriguing enough to guarantee great success for Ep9. They better course correct this franchise or they’re screwed. Trailers for Ep9 better be damn good or my guess is Ep9 won’t be nearly as powerhouse at the BO as ep8 or 9.
You see Kathleen Kennedy fired, you know deep down Disney is scared shitless of killing the SW franchise. It means they’re taking orders from the fans that are pissed... if they’re in such a position of success and power they would continue on with their misguided and arrogant “fuck the fans” attitude that got them into this laughable mess in the first place lol
BatfleckRules
It’s gotten hailed as a lightly entertaining fun movie by the few that actually bothered to watch it. That’s not enough to course correct.
Kathleen Kennedy gets fired = proof that Disney has lost confidence and is scared
And that they’re listening to the “tiny vocal minority” that don’t matter at all lol
BatfleckRules
You’re saying “other than you guys” as if our opinion doesn’t matter.
Yet you fail the include that a large percentage of us are fine waiting for these new star wars films to hit dvd before checking them out.
I know personally I’ll feel the same way about Ep9 that I did about seeing Solo in theatres (which is that I was cool not seeing it in theatres) unless it’s trailers are jaw dropping.
I did not feel this way about Ep7 or 8... i couldn’t wait to see either of those films in theatres. And as you see with Solo’s performance... there is a large crowd that feels the same way I do.
Right, Disney doesn’t care about that. They just lost 80 million on Solo.... they like it when that happens.
Hahahaha... typical fanboy in denial being a fanboy, YOU like the new Star Wars films and therefore only the people that have positive opinions on the new SW films matter to Disney
Maybe in a world where money isn’t all that matters to Disney that would be the case but I mean come on... we all know Disney loves milking cash cows.
Losing money on SW films isn’t their idea of a good time.
When SW films bombs and loses 80 mill and there’s a strong backlash from fans you don’t just double down and ignore that unless you’re fuckin stupid....
BatfleckRules
Episode 8 held in because they had the critics in their corner with a great RT percentage that’s the difference between it and BvS. BvS was torn a new asshole by the critics which would’ve affected a lot of the more casual audience from wanting to go see it. Yeah, it also had a steep drop off but that’s because a lot of the die hards were divided on whether they enjoyed it or not too.
I think what the problem is is that even tho The Last Jedi was an entertaining movie, it just left the franchise in a position where a lot of StarWRs fans are feeling there’s nothing left to look forward to now that they’ve severed ties with the main original cast members and their characters. Lando for me personally, and I know many people will feel the same, just isn’t as much of a box office draw as Luke or Han, childhood heroes for many. Lando was a far less important character than those two or even Leia.
I just think Disney was too quick to blow their load and go all in on their own characters they created as I don’t think their as good as the characters from the OT but they blew their load and now they’ve gotta lie in the bed they’ve made.
I don’t entirely disagree with you that Disney can’t do much, they can’t really backtrack, at least not at the expense of all the things you’ve mentioned.. which is why I think they’ve kinda killed the franchise. And as for Kathleen Kennedy.... she’s done.
Whether Disney chooses to say she walked away or whether they admit they fired her doesnt matter. There’s no way they keep her on after Solo’s numbers and the divisive leftist political agenda she brought into the films divided a good part of the fanbase.
I mean, that was stupid when the people of the country are so incredibly divided left vs right wtf was she even thinking
BatfleckRules
I’m not saying BvS isn’t lower in other areas as well i was just highlighting one of the biggest differences between it and TLJ. I’ve basically admitted that TLJ was more well received but a lot of people felt more disappointed with the last jedi after they had time to digest everything in the film.
I mean, the RT audience score proves the backlash isn’t nothing. Reports that Kathleen Kennedyis being removed while youtube is fired up with TLJ “sucks” rants is very telling.
Solo bombing... again, very telling. Just sit back and enjoy the ride Legend i’m gonna laugh as this disaster slowly unfolds in the coming weeks and every move Disney makes will point to the fact that they’re gonna get on their knees and blow all the haters. For Disney to double down at this point would be a huge mistake now that they don’t have Fisher, Hamill or Ford in their corner and their latest SW film was a financial disaster
They have to be VERY careful to ensure that Star Wars is profitable for years to come to have made buying the franchise a worthwhile investment. To me, I think they’ve fucked up and killed the franchise by killing off beloved characters and with the SJW pandering.
I don’t see them climbing out of this one. Better planning in terms of story direction and less blind faith in the idea that their fans would love whatever direction they’d take the franchise in could’ve prevented this
But unfortunately, I think the damage is done. In all honesty.
I think SW ep9 performs better than Solo but nowhere near as good as Ep7 or 8.
And after that, i see SW popularity continuing to dwindle more and more over time.
BatfleckRules
And really, forcing an older Lando into ep9 just shows their not confident enough in the new cast to ensure the kind of financial success they want. They lost Carrie and went SHIT better find the next best thing or were screwed! lol
So now we get Pando the droid fucker cause Disney is insane
DudeofSteel1Million
I don't really blame VII though for "losing fans" in my post above though. I admit that I freaking hated VII, but I was one of the lone voices crying out in the desert against an otherwise mostly positively received movie (from fans and critics). However, VIII on the other hand was not just me screaming in a crowd that was ignorant of my presence. TLJ divided a lot of people; more than just your average internet troll.
And though it's true that TFA was an "event" film and TLJ was bound to take a bit of a dive, the whole comparative aspect of it to the other Star Wars films taking a dip in their second outings really needs to be looked at in context of times vs. the coincidence that they had some similarities in percentage drops. TESB taking a dive from ANH must be viewed within the context of how rare sequels of the time matched their predecessors in comparison with NOWADAYS where every sequel is outright expected to at least match the first one, but more likely succeed it in box office gross.
With TPM to AOTC, you also have to view that in context as well. Clones doing so much less than TPM must be viewed quite negatively and can't really be compared with TESB. Clones, the follow-up to TPM, got eclipsed that year by Spider-Man and Lord of the Rings. A Star Wars movie for the first time in history was not the number one highest grossing movie of the year. And obviously, some of that had to do with TPM being an event film, of course, but a lot of that ALSO had to do with the disappointment some audiences felt by TPM as well.
Same must be said about TFA compared to TLJ. While TLJ was unlikely to match its predecessor, the fact that it was a full 700 million behind speaks volumes. It also kinda underwhelmed in the foreign market, contributing to its decline. In fact, that's more than half the reason why Solo's BO intake is cause for alarm because normally, the foreign box office saves even domestic flops. Films like Pirates 4 did very "meh" in the US, but its overseas gross caused it topple the billion mark. Even Rogue One, a billion dollar movie, couldn't even make 600 million foreignly. Which goes to show that if a Star Wars can't make it in America, it's not going to be saved by foreign audiences.
Solo probably could have gotten away with making 500 million when it originally cost in the under 200 million range and been relatively okay. But since the film was an absolute DISASTER in the making from all the behind the scenes drama and the MASSIVE reshoots that helped balloon the budget past 250 million (not to mention marketing costs), then it now had to be at least close to another Rogue One situation or else it lost money.
DudeofSteel1Million
But I just said that TLJ doing better than TFA was not likely...? However, it doing more than half a billion less is an issue that can't be overlooked. Not when the foreign market grows day by day and more and more movies rely on their overseas intake than their domestic. Think of film franchises that have high-grosses on one initial movie, but then fall downwards for sequels - The Dark Knight crossed the billion mark. The Dark Knight Rises made a hundred million less domestically, but grossed more than The Dark Knight because the overseas intake was greater. Avengers made 1.5 billion - 623 million of that came from the US/Canada. Avengers: Age of Ultron didn't even make 500 million domestically, but it still nearly matched its predecessor worldwide at 1.4 billion because its international gross was greater. So yes, statistically speaking TLJ kinda did fall off a cliff. It was by no means a "flop," but its drops were abnormal by today's standards.
Whether you want to acknowledge the backlash or not, it does exist and it exists outside the internet. I think you're mitigating the backlash too much to just the radical racists and misogynists when it extends far beyond that. There's not much opposition to the new cast so much as what TLJ ended up doing to them. I don't like any of the new cast and it has nothing to do with the color of their skin or their gender. I don't like them because their characters are uninteresting, annoying, ridiculous, etc. But we're not talking about me. Most of the "backlash" against TLJ that I've seen came from people who LIKED TFA and hated or were disappointed with what TLJ did to the characters.
As for merchandising, it should be noted that Star Wars merchandising has seen a downward spiral despite their being a plethora of new movies. You wouldn't believe how many leftover action figures of Captain Phasma and Rose Tico toys never left their shelves. There are a number of factors that can be attributed to this, but regardless of the reasons, none of it looks good for the market when toy sales for one of the biggest merchandising movie bonanzas dips 56% from when the first movie in your new franchise is launched. Disney's got plenty of cash to spare of course, but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem.
I don't see how Solo was a "most assured financial disaster." True, a lot of people were skeptical about seeing a Han Solo movie without Harrison Ford, but it's still a "Star Wars" movie in a new franchise that has seen nothing but billion+ dollar intakes. And even amidst the height of negativity, projections were as high as 170 million not far from its opening weekend. Even I thought it would do fine. I was even discussing it with a few people and contrary to my hatred for these new films, I even said, "it'll probably make nearly a billion dollars and they'll continue making garbage because people will gleefully line their pockets." So I was shocked to see it open lower than even Justice League.
Now I'm not saying that Episode 9 will be another Solo-like disaster, but all these factors add up to an alarming possibility of disappointing results. You yourself agreed that Disney/Lucasfilm are in danger of oversaturating the market with Star Wars films and leading to franchise fatigue. In less than three years, we've had four Star Wars movies, which is more than any of the two trilogies released prior at one given timeframe. TLJ seemed poised to make AT LEAST Avengers-type money, but it crashed and burned in the biggest market outside the US and had a relatively mute overseas gross overall when compared to other big franchise movies. Taking that into account against what is likely to be at least a somewhat lesser domestic intake, it's possible that it could crawl to a billion when it should be able to run.
DudeofSteel1Million
VIII didn't do that much better than Rogue One though. And for the record, Rogue One had better legs at the box office too. Take into account also that VIII had a really large opening weekend that was only a little over 20 million behind The Force Awakens, the second highest opening weekend ever (at the time), and yet despite beating out The Avengers and Jurassic World at that feat, it couldn't reach either of them when its domestic run ended.
You can't just equate ONE reason why Star Wars keeps suffering steep declines in China. Especially not when they're getting more familiar with the brand with each passing movie, which would make you think it'd only do better there as time went on. They don't like it for more than just one reason. There were several reasonings stated for why they didn't see TLJ. One reason was even equated to that it didn't have enough "Beautiful people" in it (which seems ridiculous, but whatever). And none of Lucasfilm's attempts to appeal to their market (having two asian leads in Rogue One and TLJ) have been successful in grabbing their attention either.
I'm not blaming TLJ solely for Solo's demise, but to ignore that it had ANY effect at all seems to be you just making excuses just because you like the movie. Even still, you'd think that if it was just general lack of interest in Solo that would cause this, then word of mouth (it got an A- cinemascore) would be good enough to encourage people to see it and it'd have some leg-power. But no. It dipped 65% despite facing no "new" competition.
If Solo was such a surefire underperformer as you so claim, then why did Lucasfilm have enough confidence in it to release it so close to TLJ's release in the first place or allow its budget to balloon to 250 (contradicting reports even state 300) million or why was its box office projections so high? Disney is a smart studio. Though Lucasfilm is the ones making the films, Disney is still the distributor/owner of the company and if they smelled trouble with oversaturating the market, they would have moved the release date. They didn't. They were confident it would do just fine. Again, you seem to just be making excuses in an attempt to exempt any blame from TLJ affecting its performance when I didn't even say it was the only reason.
DudeofSteel1Million
While it's true RO was riding on 7's success, 8 should have been riding that wave that much more considering it was a sequel. But like I said, it opened bigger than any other movie besides 7 at the time and then petered out below Avengers and Jurassic World both domestically and WW. There was plenty written about what China thought about TLJ, one of which I already mentioned. The numbers speak for themselves. If they liked it, they would have seen it. And you'd think that at the very least it would start catching on there considering even with their unfamiliarity with the brand, TFA still made nearly 125 million there.
Why should we care? That's a silly question to ask. Yes, studios take less from the foreign market than the domestic, but it's rare that big blockbuster movies would even break even were it not for the foreign market. I already mentioned Pirates for one - 4 and 5 would have outright bombed if it weren't for the foreign market. Same with Transformers 4. Even Justice League, as terrible as it did, made over 60% of its final gross overseas. So it matters. And if Star Wars just remains an American thing, it's not going to make the big bucks.
8 had smaller legs than RO. That is a fact. Because of the holiday season both were released on, the day-to-day numbers remained fairly consistent for a while, but once it was over, TLJ took deeper dives while RO kinda steadied out.
The exit poll data? It's kinda hard to account for that considering how inconsistent it is. Solo got an A- and yet it nosedived 65%. TLJ's divisiveness was a factor in its performance. Just consider the word of mouth in comparison to TFA. All over, you pretty much heard nothing but glowing reception for that film to the point where you got ostracized immediately if you didn't like it. People began changing their tunes for TLJ. Even its biggest defenders felt it. Why do you think there were/are so many articles STILL dedicated to not only defending it, but continuing to mention its ripple effect on the franchise? Why do you think YouTube videos nowadays DEFENDING the movie get almost as much thumbs down as they do thumbs up when beforehand you'd get crucified if you hated TFA (and yeah, I know... you hate YouTube examples... But it's a part of gauging results whether you like it or not). I'm not the only one who has stated this, which makes it less of a "theory" so much as a factor (not THE fact, but a factor).
Who is to say 9 won't suffer a similar fate to 8? Again, two weeks ago, the chatter was that Solo would be the biggest Memorial day-weekend opening in history. While it's true that the ripple effect would be cemented completely based on how 9 does, there's nothing saying that it definitely won't be affected like you claim.
DudeofSteel1Million
And yet RO's opening weekend gross was 29.1% of its total while TLJ was 35.5%. Keep in mind also that TLJ also had a steep 67% second weekend drop as well. In the end, RO simply had the better legs and it was indicative that its WOM was stronger.
"How do they know if they like it before they saw it, lol?" Those that DID see it clearly didn't recommend it, indicating poor word of mouth - ergo, they didn't like it. lol.
"freshness matters" Indeed, freshness matters, but so does WOM and the strength of a brand and well-crafted sequel. Again, I never stated that TLJ would have done better than TFA even if it was a good movie (which I don't think it is) liked by all. The Hunger Games 2 did better than the first, PIrates 2 did better than the first, friggin Transformers 2 did better than the first, LOTR The Two Towers did better than FOTR, etc. Then you must consider the expansion of the international market where even films that do LESS than their predecessors can still thrive. Like TDKR - less domestic than TDK, more foreignly. Age of Ultron - less domestic than TA, more foreignly. etc. And lastly, it's never just ONE factor. There's ALWAYS more than one factor that goes into these things. There really wasn't a "ceiling" for VIII. It could have reached for the stars, but not quite matched TFA (at least not domestically). But like it or not, it WAS divisive and though that wasn't the ONLY reason for its final intake, it was a factor.
Solo probably would have done better in December, but how much better? Probably not much. You yourself think it was doomed to fail, so that means it doesn't really matter when it was released as the odds were stacked against it.
I hardly think "reviews" would have helped. I mean, 71% is still "Fresh" and even still, audiences and critics are seeing rather large divides, at least when it comes to Star Wars.
I'd be glad to revisit this discussion when IX lands because you're right that its performance would cement the notion of whether or not Disney/Lucasfilm is wearing out their own brand and dividing the fanbase with their creative decisions. If IX is well-liked by almost everyone, I'm sure it'll do great. If it's as divisive as TLJ, it's easy to see that people will vote with their wallets and WOM will be poor.
I agree about Anthony Ingruber. He did a fine young Harrison Ford impression in Age of Adeline, so they passed up a golden opportunity. Alden was chosen because he was a top recommendation from Spielberg and NOT based on his audition, so that's a major strike against the decision. He looks NOTHING like Harrison, he sounds nothing like Harrison and his acting leaves a lot to be desired (he came off as flat and wooden pretty often, so it's easy to see why he needed acting coaches).
And overall, it's just stupid to keep aping off the OT like this for the anthology series. Like Solo, nobody really asked for a Boba Fett movie either. He was a bit character who had a cool appearance and then went out like a chump in Jedi. He doesn't NEED a movie, especially since his coolness was based on his mystique. And we already got his "origin" in AOTC anyways. Star Wars spans thousands of years with thousands of characters and thousands of stories to capitalize on - and instead, they keep making the universe smaller.
DudeofSteel1Million
Oh, come on... TLJ had an opening weekend that was just over 20 million shy of TFA. You can't tell me that was franchise fatigue. If it actually had the same WOM/legs as TFA, it would have fallen into the 750-800 million domestic range, but it didn't.
We've been over the Christmas thing before and I have the same response in regards to its performance: swap out its Christmas Eve with its Christmas Day gross and you still get a drop within the 64% range. Even still for comparison's sake, if you were to take TFA's gross on the weekdays leading up to Christmas eve just so you could compare it to TLJ, TFA would have made 102 million, which is a 58% drop in comparison to TLJ's 67% drop - and that's accounting for the fact that I was comparing weekday results. So either way you look at it, TLJ plummeted between its first and second weekends.
I have not read the WSJ article because I'm not subscribed to their newsletters nor have an account on their site. Give me the skinny on it.
DudeofSteel1Million
But that's still taking into account that extra day for opportunities to inflate the numbers. You can't just assume that the same exact number of people will have gone to the movies for a 3-day weekend as they would a 4-day weekend. Again, we've been over this and the merit remains the same.
TLJ maintaining its intake over the holiday weekdays really doesn't speak out as strong word of mouth so much as it is advantageous of its release slot. Even Justice League benefited from its holiday release slot. And then there's the fact that two other movies over the same span of time (Jumanji and The Great Showman) also saw abnormal holds as well even for well-liked movies.
I never said I expected TLJ to have the same kind of legs as TFA, but to have something akin to it shouldn't be out of the norm were it a well-liked sequel.
Nothing about my statements against TLJ's BO have anything to do with my personal hatred of the film. They're just numbers. And when even the pundits who went out of their way to defend the movie admit to its somewhat underwhelming performance, then you have to know that stating that isn't just related to biases.
All factors I'd agree with in regards to it hurting the final performance, but its horrific BTS problems weren't nor should it have been the only thing preventing it from having a good marketing campaign. There's no reason they couldn't have picked a couple of random scenes and slapped together a good teaser even with all the drama BTS and stitch it to TLJ screenings. Even the first Star Wars film had a teaser released for the Christmas of 76 and that film arguably had even more problems and studio/director politics going on. Besides - it wouldn't be the first time a film used footage that would never be shown again to advertise itself. Hell, the trailers for Solo that DID get released had plenty of scenes that I didn't see in the final film ANYWAYS even accounting for their late schedule anyways.
DudeofSteel1Million
I don't care about "narratives" in regards to the box office. That's why I was merely stating the numbers and leaving my personal hatred for TLJ out of it. Keep in mind also that TLJ was not the only movie of that month to benefit from increases thanks to the holidays. Both Jumanji and The Greatest Showman also saw increases over their first weeks in subsequent weeks as well. And again, you can't just account for an extra day to split the difference because that's still 24 hours of extra opportunity to make more money when without it, there would definitely be a lesser intake.
Exactly. LucasFilm was obviously CONFIDENT in their product, which is why it's silly to say that Solo was always doomed to fail just because it was a movie people were iffy on seeing without Harrison Ford. Had the movie itself been "good", it would have been seen.
DudeofSteel1Million
And as I already said, TLJ was not the only movie of that December to see significant weekly increases, which showed that the holiday season was more akin to keeping it afloat as opposed to the movie itself showing remarkable legs.
The fact that they allowed Solo's budget to balloon to such unbelievable heights showed that they clearly were confident enough in its ability to recoup its costs or else they wouldn't go to such lengths to "save" it in the first place. Clearly, studios release embarrassingly bad films all the time, but they're never seen as an embarrassment if they make a shitload of money. Paramount never showed any signs of embarrassment over the Transformers movies until they actually stopped churning out a profit. Don't be so naive to think that the ONLY reason they allowed the reshoots of Solo was because they cared about its cinematic integrity. They wouldn't do that in the first place if they didn't have faith it could make bank DESPITE the inflated costs.
DudeofSteel1Million
And yet both previous SW films exhibited stronger legs, indicating better WOM, which was part of my point all along. The 2nd weekend drop I was using as an indicator of its decline, not the sole reason. Nothing I did was "randomly" swapping numbers so much as not accounting for that extra day.
That still doesn't account for the fact that they let the budget inflate to absurd numbers. They had faith in their brand, which as you said is their bread and butter. They thought it could make bank. They wouldn't take the risk if they felt otherwise. It's simply silly to think that Solo was always "doomed to fail." And besides, as I've already established, their merchandising of the brand hasn't been doing so hot as of late, so they can't rely on that to save themselves all the time.
DudeofSteel1Million
I did account for the effect hence why I switched the dates. And either way you look at it, the film had a hefty drop. Even by your own methods, you couldn't change the fact that the film fell heavily. And again, I wasn't even using the 2nd weekend dip as the only reason/example of TLJ having a lesser BO performance than its predecessors. It was merely one factor. The numbers speak for themselves. TLJ's opening weekend accounted for 35+% of its final gross whereas both RO and TFA were in the 20% range. And then that's not even accounting for the blu-ray sales that were recently released. TLJ sold only 4% more copies than RO, but dropped 56% from TFA's sales. And then I also brought up the merchandising which, again, was a 56% dip from TFA.
Who is to say Lord and Miller's version would have hurt the brand that badly? Who is to say that their version was even "bad" at all? They're both competent filmmakers with a good track record to boot. And seeing as how Solo wasn't even that well liked by both critics and audiences, despite all the effort that went into changing it, then it's doubtful their version would have fared much worse.
It was a battle of creative differences and simply another example of Kathleen Kennedy proving herself incapable of getting along with her hired directors. Remaking the movie twice was a financial risk, but they banked on it because they had little reason to think it wouldn't at least have no trouble breaking even. They already had 3 movies in a row that made over a billion and they got overconfident.
And now there's even talk/reports that Kathleen Kennedy is going to step down from Lucasfilm. I don't necessarily believe them and it's still steeped heavily in the rumor-mill pile, but the fact that there's even talk at ALL about it goes to show that something went seriously wrong. And in that sense, the "long game" isn't really working out so hot.
DudeofSteel1Million
Again, normalizing it is not a good indicator because you are still accounting for several days afterward while still neglecting the KEY factor, which is the actual days that happened to have a significant drop.
Infinity War is a different story because A) No Marvel film has grossed 936 million domestically and B) For whatever domestic legs it lacks, it more than makes up for it foreignly. Infinity War, as of writing this, is only a hair away from crossing 2 billion WW. It's entirely possible it's going to match or even succeed TFA when all is said and done. Something TLJ was nowhere near close to being able to do.
Don't give me that nonsense again. Had TLJ been better liked, there's no reason why it couldn't have done better. Every big film pretty much is front loaded unless your name is James Cameron. But the fact of the matter remains that TLJ has the weakest BO legs of all the new Star Wars films. And that's not just represented AT the box office even. It's represented in the merchandising and it's represented in the blu-ray sales. You can't blame everything on franchise fatigue.
So? Wouldn't be the first time a studio got the wrong idea on the direction of a movie. And again, there's nothing to say that the movie would have fared any worse had they just let Lord and Miller do their thing.
DudeofSteel1Million
See, here's the thing: you normalize TLJ gross to save it from the notion that it suffered a 67% plummet, yet you don't take this into account for any other film that ever landed on a holiday. It just seems like an excuse to stop any negative narrative that would otherwise suggest that the film didn't have great word of mouth.
Now I never equated TLJ's WOM as being on par with BvS or SS, but when compared to its predecessors which both had a better run at the BO from week to week with the OW amounting to less a percentage of its overall gross, then it cannot be denied that TLJ indeed took a hit in its performance. This is also shown beyond its BO gross and into the merchandising sales and blu-ray sales, all of which had a significant drop. Then there's to account for the lackluster overseas gross and you got a successful, but somewhat underwhelming final gross. And then there's Solo - which, yes, was affected by TLJ. You can choose to ignore that based upon your personal love for the film, but that's just the equivalent of plugging your ears and shouting "not listening."
DudeofSteel1Million
You're right about one thing: There SHOULD have been an audience for Solo. However, even though TLJ is not the only reason for Solo's failure, it is a factor. And how can you possibly say the "character" of Han Solo can't draw a crowd?
I'm not ignoring it so much as it ultimately is not within the longrun parameters of what I've been saying this whole time. TLJ had weaker legs than TFA and RO. And though it wasn't a "flop," it was the beginning of the problems LucasFilm is now facing.
DudeofSteel1Million
Dude, come on. It just sounds like you're using your love of the film as an excuse to defend its box office results. I mean, even the major news outlets and box office analysts, some of which have gone out of their way on a personal level to defend TLJ from the "racist/misogynistic/homophobic" whatever "attacks" have even acknowledged the effects TLJ have had on Solo's performance.
I just don't buy into the whole "franchise fatigue" thing. Granted, I don't deny that it played a part in Solo's failure, but being deemed the SOLE factor is just silly. If the movies were all universally loved, it wouldn't be that much of an issue. And again, while TLJ never suffered tremendously large drops sans its second weekend, its legs were shorter than TFA and RO while also churning out unimpressive foreign returns, especially in big markets like China.
Nobody was itching to see Jumanji prior to its release. In fact, the trailers were more often criticized as looking stupid and matters weren't helped that it was following a movie that was made famous by the late Robin Williams. The movie itself impressed because it had legs of steel. Similarities showed with The Greatest Showman as well.
TLJ's negative effect showed itself more in the aftermath of its BO run than its initial performance. That was my point all along. You're right that we'll see just how bad its effects are when Episode 9 rolls around, but things are not looking bright for the future of the franchise as of right now. From a financial standpoint that is...
DudeofSteel1Million
Consider the difference though in regards to the fact that films like Civil War more than make up for their front-loadedness by A) being part of a franchise that rapidly pops out films on average of 2-3 times a year and B) more than making up for their troubles by way of a high foreign gross. Lest we forget that TLJ had a rather ho-hum foreign intake that was only about 100 million above its domestic intake. Also, no Star Wars movie before TLJ ever had an opening weekend % of its gross above 29%, which still shows that TLJ had the weakest domestic legs.
But that's just PART of my point in regards to TLJ dividing audiences. Its box office performance isn't the ONLY factor to take into consideration, which is why it's sort of moot to hold its performance in such high esteem.
See, if Lucasfilm thought the majority never had a vested interest in it, they wouldn't have A) let the budget bloat to absurd levels by making the movie again and B) released the movie so soon after TLJ. They also wouldn't have flipped out over its box office results being so low by reportedly putting all anthology films "on hold" if they had even the slightest doubt that Solo wouldn't be a hit.
This is one of the many reasons why you can't rule out that TLJ indeed caused some damage to the brand as Rogue One rode the coattails of TFA's success while Solo plundered into the depths of hell.
DudeofSteel1Million
But Solo is not the only case of a bunch of directors who were booted off a Star Wars project under the supervision of Kathleen Kennedy. They are quite literally example number 4. It just so happens that it's the worst case seeing as how it was so late in the game. And again, there's nothing beyond Lucasfilm's decision that would indicate that Solo would have fared any worse had Lord & Miller been allowed to finish it. Because despite their efforts, Solo managed to damage the brand regardless.
They overestimated the power of the brandname IN GENERAL. They were overconfident and thought it would make bank because it was a Star Wars film. It didn't. And now they've put the anthology series on the backburner as a response.
There is a lot to say VIII damaged the brand. This was the movie after it and had VIII been a universally-loved movie, there's no reason to not think Solo would have rode its coattails in a similar way Rogue One rode TFA's success wave. Again, the "embittered fanboys" have spread outside just the confines of the internet. And while I am not saying that the "boycott" affected Solo in any monumental way, the "effect" of TLJ's divisiveness was "a" factor. Not "the" factor, but "a" factor.
NinjaGamer13
You love to hear the sound of your own voice don't you? Doesn't matter what dreck comes out, it's all good., right?
NinjaGamer13
It's dreck because you are not thoughtfully attacking the performances, merely taking a long time to type your simple opinion.
Terrence
Almost everything you tried to use as an argument in your comment is absolute drivel. There's a lot of actors that don’t get constant awards acclaim but they’re still good actors. Your Henry Cavill point was just nonsense. When did we start using the razzies as justification for anything? They’re the biggest hack job in the industry. That’s widely known and accepted. Lets be honest here, Affleck gave us the best live action Batman/Bruce Wayne we’ve ever had or ever likely to have period in BvS. He was outstanding in that film. Saying we have “shit actors in these roles” is ludicrous and frankly just insulting. It says a lot about your maturity.
Terrence
So apparently to you his success is based on whether he only lands leading roles in movies that have made a cultural impact? are you serious? I'm genuinely pretty shocked. You are reaching pretty hard right now buddy. Christopher Reeve was perceived as a real life superhero at that time due to the fact there was almost nothing out there in a serious feature film format that portrayed a superhero like that. It was very unique and very much a success based on it's time and place in history. You simply cannot compare that era to present day. Not in the bloated, tedious superhero movie climate we currently live in.
Henrys next upcoming project is MI:6 Fallout. He's clearly the standout from the footage based on reactions and reviews I've seen. He's shockingly stealing the spotlight from the legend that is Tom Cruise. He's definitely popular enough.
It's funny how things work out isn't it? All those actors from the big successful MCU try to do other projects outside of that universe and are almost across the board hard flops, with the exception of a very select few. An actor comes along from the big bad DCEU and lands the big jobs. It's rather satisfying to watch.
Terrence
Us "guys" throw around words like "amazing" because that's how we feel. We thought it was amazing. We loved it. No other agenda, it is as simple as that. We don't need faceless internet hacks like yourself attacking us and blindly hating us for it. Doesn't look like you're getting much support from anyone with what you're saying yourself, so i'll end this here. It's useless at this point.
Have a good day.
BatfleckRules
You have to back up your subjective opinion with a bunch of rambling and facts the same way he does for your opinion to count...
and even if you do go through the hassle of backing up your own subjective opinion with “facts” which can be an awkward thing to do
Hell still shoot your opinion down in the end if he disagrees
Hell try to make you feel like you’re wrong for enjoying what you enjoy
BatfleckRules
Maybe their performances weren’t amazing, but I don’t think it’s fair to say Affleck may have well been a mannequin like jesus christ dude lol
His scene where he’s flirting with Dianna at that party in BVS is one of the best examples of playboy Bruce I’ve ever seen
It’s not fake, look at me, i’m Bruce Wayne pretending to be an obnoxious drunk playboy 😵 it was the real deal actual playboy Bruce shining through a little bit
NinjaGamer13
It's not the actors, but the script and director that resulted in the DCEU sucking. The actors are more than capable.
NinjaGamer13
No, not really, it's just your opinion. Ezra, Gal and Momoa were far worse in my opinion. Unless you can judge them by some objective criteria?
NinjaGamer13
No, fewer people don't hate them. If you think that is so provide a source. All actors brought equal 'humor' to their roles.
StarTheory
"Lets be honest here, Affleck gave us the best live action Batman/Bruce Wayne we’ve ever had or ever likely to have period in BvS"
No, that's your opinion. Bale's Batman still remains the best Batman in my eyes because they knew that there is more to Batman than just being a fighter.
Terrence
Yes, you're right it is my opinion. Are you saying the only thing to Afflecks Batman is fighting? With all due respect, if that's all you got from his portrayal in that film from beginning to end, then this isn't even worth debating.
StarTheory
True, I forgot he was murdering physcopath as well.
BatfleckRules
That’s writing though.
As far as performance like come on man Batman literally sounds like he belongs in a Viking metal band in TDK.
I think it’s fair to say that his Batman voice is almost embarrassingly bad... like if you honestly just think of it for a sec
WHuRRZZShuhaSHTRIGGHHURr
BatfleckRules
I must admit, so far Cavill hasn’t shown much in the way of acting ability. The reason I like Cavill as Superman is because I see great potential.
With the right director, and the right script, I could see him being pretty good. Can’t see him being amazing but I can see him being. great Superman given that Superman although a charismatic character doesn’t posses any whacky personality traits that would necessitate an incredible performance. The movies Zack Snyder did really didn’t provide Superman with much of a personality throughout the script either as he hardly had anything to do or say.
I thought Gal Gadot was great in Wonder Woman. She great charisma and it’s not hard for it to pour through in her performances... she doesn’t feel awkward and felt very natural in WW but she also had a great director behind her.
As for the Fleck, I totally see where people are coming from on a lot of his performances but as the dark and brooding Dark Knight I’ve literally had no issues with the way he has acted in either BvS or JL. Some of his scenes in BvS have some of the finest acting I’ve ever seen from Affleck.
I definitely think Batman is a good role for him as it forced him to kind of snap into that dark brooding, no nonsense type of character and it just didn’t allow any room for Affleck’s typical on screen awkwardness or overacting. I don’t think his performance was mind blowing or anything... but I was just so surprised that he never made me cringe throughout the entirety of BvS and Jl as he usually always manages to Make me cringe with most of his performances.
BatfleckRules
No scene any other actor could’ve done... first of all, you have to have a look similar to Bruce Wayne or it’s not going to feel right. So right out of the gate, Affleck dressed up the way he was already had one big thing checked off the list and he’s got that going for him over so many other Hollywood actors.
Now, as far as scenes that are there to show off mad acting chops... I don’t really think Bruce Wayne/Batman is really the type of character that requires some sort of an incredible performance.
I could say the same thing about Bale. There’s nothing he did in TDK movies that I couldn’t see a handful of other male actors pulling off (looks of the character aside)
I can’t think of a single Bale Bruce Wayne scene that is mind bending or anything like that it was all pretty much standard broody Batman/handsome playboy routine as is pretty standard for the Batman character.
And as for Batman don’t even say his Batman voice was hard to do, because I can, without trying,do bales batman voice perfectly and it sounds exactly like him.
Lol I swear
BatfleckRules
Agree that he’s a more skilled actor than Affleck. Disagree that his performance was any more skilled than Affleck’s. I really don’t see how Bruce Wayne took advantage of Bales incredible acting skills.
I can’t think of one scene that Bale pulled off in that trilogy that a number of other actors couldn’t have easily pulled off as well.
And as I said, I can match Bales Batman voice to a tee. I wish I could send you a recording to show you how spot on my impression is lol
Even fantastic actors struggle with certain roles and if the growly heavy metal voice was the best Bale could do to sound convicng as Batman i think it’s fair to see he was miscast as Batman.
But hey, that’s just how I feel I don’t like him in the role at all. You don’t like Affleck.
To each his own
BatfleckRules
Many agree with you that he was a great Batman. But I really, truly and wholeheartedly dislike Bale in the role by the time the credits of TDKR rolled.
Started out doing a good thing in Batman Begins... didn’t do anything for me in either of the sequels. No fooling myself at all.
I do not see Bruce Wayne when Bale is on screen
But you already know how overrated I find TDK movies to be. I think they’re more well made films than either of Zack Snyders films, but they just don’t do a thing for me as I don’t just don’t like Nolan’s vision.
Plain and simple
BatfleckRules
For me, I’m still waiting for the definitive version. That could be Affleck if he gets the right film, so far he’s been my favourite overall even though he’s only been in mediocre movies.
I’m with you, Batman has been my favourite character since around that time but i was born in 1990. Animated series and adam west are where it started for me. I liked Spider-man too but not as much as Batman.
I don’t see Bale as the definitive look pretty much based on his performance and looks. The costume, the voice, the dialogue... It’s just not a true comics Batman to me.
I’ll admit it’s inaccurate for them to have a Batman that crosses the line with his enemies, but I was able to roll with their idea, I liked what they were doing with Affleck’s Batman and he’s the one that reminds me the most of comics Batman and the first version of Batman/Bruce Wayne I was exposed to (BTAS and Adam West)
Nolan’s series very much feel like movies made by a man that wasn’t familiar with the comics. Everything seems tweaked or altered to suit his taste rather than an accurate depiction of what’s in the comics. And yes, he kept the no killing rule in tact which is honorable. The films were also well written and well structured... but his overall vision just doesn’t impress me or make me say “that’s Batman”
I feel like I’m watching films by made by a guy that “kinda” got it. To me, he was much closer to hitting the nail on the head with Batman Begins. And then I think he injected the sequels with too much Nolan and that’s where I stopped seeing eye to eye with him.
ZaQueerdo
In Cavill's defense, he hasn't had good material to work with. I saw him in Man from U.N.C.L.E. and he did a much better job.
I think under a director like Matthew Vaughn or J.A. Bayona, he'd give a pretty good turn as Superman.
Seb is a Socialist
go away sockpuppet
ZaQueerdo
LOL what?
Seb is a Socialist
i know its u legend. sad that u have to create someone named queer.
ZaQueerdo
If you're gonna accuse everyone who isn't a fan of Snyder's direction of being a sockpuppet you're gonna have a bad time.
Seb is a Socialist
then is it a coincidence that u arrived the same day legend makes his comeback?
ZaQueerdo
Probably because I didn't. I was already posting on several older articles (such as the discussing Jay Olivia's claim that Snyder's plan was an epic 5 film arc).
Seb is a Socialist
its funny isnt it. u look at the comments on that article and its all love for snyder. makes you feel small dont it bud?
ZaQueerdo
Uh, no? Why would it?
Seb is a Socialist
bc it makes u feel worthless commentin further knowin that u will never quate that love.
ZaQueerdo
Er, no, someone having a different opinion than me about a movie is not gonna make me feel worthless, lol. Though I'd love to apply that to other parts of life. "Makes you feel kinda small that people like peppermint ice cream and you don't, huh?" lol
Seb is a Socialist
no one likes peppermint ice cream. thats disgusting. second leave this site.
ZaQueerdo
Nope and nope.
ZaQueerdo
Nah.
Seb is a Socialist
do it
ZaQueerdo
Nah, I think I like it here.
ZaQueerdo
Yes, I am. It's in the name.
Seb is a Socialist
u need to stop being homophobic. its 2018 move on
ZaQueerdo
Interesting theory.
Seb is a Socialist
theories are facts so thx
ZaQueerdo
Nah.
Seb is a Socialist
yah
ZaQueerdo
Nah.
Seb is a Socialist
yah
ZaQueerdo
Nope.
Seb is a Socialist
yup
ZaQueerdo
Nah. Am gonna quiet you though. Bye-bye!
Seb is a Socialist
bye
BatfleckRules
Exactly it’s Snyders fault at the end of the day. The director is the one the oversaw BVS’ development, determined the style, tone, the type of character he wants Superman to be.
He instructed Superman to act that way, he approved the film that realized a vision of Superman with very little dialogue... a vision of Superman without any sense of optimism or charisma.
Take Mark Hamill for example, he said he fundamentally disagreed with Rian Johnson’s vision of Luke for TLJ but he did exactly what Rian wanted him to do and put his all into it to fully realize Rian’s vision because it’s what he was getting paid to do
A better director and. better script you could get a great performance out of Cavill.
Seb is a Socialist
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. WHY DO YOU KEEP COMIN BACK????????????????????????
Seb is a Socialist
maybe u should be spendin time bein a better parent to your kid instead of wasting ur life on the interwebs mr engineer.
Seb is a Socialist
ill give u credit bud. that last line was insult comic gold. but u really should be spendin ur time indoctrinatin ur babe with last jedi instead of bein on this forum where ur not wanted.
Seb is a Socialist
kirk who?
honestly bud the day u returned was the day 4 new sockpupets arose. how do u explain that?
Seb is a Socialist
it is true. want their names?
Seb is a Socialist
exactly. cuz u brought them here bc u have no life outside of this site. i sincerly doubt u even have a kid.
Seb is a Socialist
u know they created a page about you on this wiki lol
"Lol, no honey, that's not how opinions work. Here's how opinions work: mine is more informed then yours and therefore more relevant to the conversation. Now piss off."
Seb is a Socialist
it is but that was one of your quotes posted below.
Seb is a Socialist
ninjas the only monkey here bud. now leave like u said u would
Seb is a Socialist
whatre u talkin bout? i posted it bc u had a right to know.
Seb is a Socialist
alright bud go back to your "baby"
Seb is a Socialist
how and bring a final sockpuppet b4 ur exit. freakin classy bud
Seb is a Socialist
sigh
Seb is a Socialist
shouldnt u be breast feeding ur imaginary child
Seb is a Socialist
actualy men can apparently breast feed lolol.
hey man u can tell them to take a pic it will last longer like in the office lolz
Seb is a Socialist
:)
Real Mav
And JL did not get a Razzie nomination. The Razzies are horrible. And that’s been known for a while.
NinjaGamer13
Jeez, she’s got a ton of legendary casting under her belt! Shame to see her go! Hopefully things don’t go downhill without her...
dugzino
Isn't it already going downhill? I mean... It's WB we're talking about. One of the shittiest studios out there with the biggest IPs.
NinjaGamer13
Not wrong, lol, but I’m referring to their casting specifically, which has been pretty consistently very solid for some time now
dugzino
Oh ye. Ye. Many great casting choices. Still don't like Gadot as WW (except for the looks) but the rest is on point.
NinjaGamer13
Gal Gadot has done nothing but deliver as WW. I’m not sure what you wouldn’t like about her...?
NinjaGamer13
Her accent and bland acting? Lack of any muscle definition is also lame.
Yeah yeah, don't bother replying, you write paragraphs defending and justifying anything Snyder touches, we get it.
dugzino
I actually love whatever Zack does. His movies are great. But the casting choice for WW is bad. I don't mind the lack of muscles. The looks, she has it, but the acting is meh. not Jennifer Lawrence or Annabelle Wallis bad, but still.
dugzino
She's a bad actress. Mediocre at best. There are way better actresses out who deserve way more praise than her.
ItzSilentStorm
one of the shittiest studios? What? Is your reasoning for saying that simply because DC has been having troubles?
ken
Fanboys stupid fanboys. A studio that just had a record breaking year and is already on the roll this year is call called shitty because their salty about their comics IP.
ItzSilentStorm
i mean I dont agree with some of the decisions WB has made(i still think they should have just let Snyder finish and release his version of JL), but to suggest WB is horrible company just because of some of the recent DC issues is silly. And that is besides the fact that both Wonder Woman and Lego Batman were very successful last year. But aside from that they had also had hits such as IT, Dunkirk, Annabelle Creation, Kong, and a few others resulting in one of their strongest years ever.
dugzino
That's what I'm aiming at. The DC. I could've detailed but I thought it was obvious, being on a DC Comics fanmade website. I could've brought up last years Blade Runner and King Arthur as well. Movie that should've made way more. But they're biggest marketing were for DC (which they failed at) and Rowling's book based movies (which they don't fail at).
Qthetar .
Lol. Shut up. They might not be doing well with the DCEU. But they have put out great movies every year and big hits. In fact they made some of my favorite movies of all time. It’s a legendary studio. A very top studio. That’s not even counting their animation department for DC and other stuff.
dugzino
You're praising the wrong people. Blade Runner 2 & King Arthur for example should've hit wait more than they did. They both were my favs of last year and they both flopped, if I remember the numbers.
They do quality movies, when they leave their directors alone, but their marketing is awful AF. And for that, you can blame WB.
Qthetar .
That’s actually one of the qualities of WB they let their directors do their thing. Both MOS and BvS was completely Snyder movies. They even let him convince Nolan to change some parts of the movie. But they flopped, so obviously they will panic with JL. Patty was left alone, Wan and Sandberg are left alone.
Terrence
“One of the Shittiest studios out there” eh what?? What’s that based on? That’s just nonsense and you know it. If I’m not mistaken weren’t WB the FIRST studio to hit 2 BILLION dollars domestically alone for film in 2017? Oh that’s right they were.
Hunter Zolomon
No film has hit 2 Billion domestically and no film ever will, right now the highest grossing film domestically is The Force Awakens and that hasn't even hit 1 billion domestically.
Terrence
I'm not talking about a single film you fool. I'm saying that out of ALL releases WB released in 2017, they were the First studio of that year to hit 2 billion dollars domestically with their movies combined.
Nahuel Benvenuto
lol what? teh same studio that risked a lot of money making barely comercial works of art like Blade Runner 2049 or Mad Max Fury Road?
Jonathan Radnidge
How could she have helped cast Keaton if she’s been there less than 20 years?
BatmanNewsChris
That's my mistake. She was a protege of the person who cast Keaton as Batman. I'll update my post.
Kryptonian Knight
She has a great track record but I’m sure whoever comes in will do well too. WB did not have the success they wanted with all their DC properties but they do a great job with everything else.
Talia
The amount of screen time an actor has is not the head of casting's job. Don't think I need to tell you that.
Talia
You state that the casting of the DCEU is mixed, and then you go on to complain of the lack of screen time to properly judge these characters. You can't conclude one thing when you're lacking the basis to assess it properly.
Joshua J. Dazzle Bevel
Good point. I would only say that bad direction only made it worse. Even the best actors/actresses can falter under bad direction. Check the Star Wars prequels for proof of that.
The good news is that under good direction, we can see some really good performances. WW proved that. I’m hoping that Aquaman and other DC solo films will prove this as well.
Seb is a Socialist
aww another sock joins the fray.
PK
i would leave the company to after that atrocious justice league!!!!
ZaQueerdo
I was just about to say, I feel like Cavill and Eisenberg might be better under different direction and with better writing.
