Shazam Shazam: Fury of the Gods General News and Discussion Thread

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Was projected to open with 85M owrldwide and the first movie had a 155M worldwide opening.

Man... audiences even had more interest in Morbius.

 

[Comicbookguy339]

Man... audiences even had more interest in Morbius.

I'm guessing that after No Way Home, Sony managed to trick enough people into believing that Morbius would tie into the MCU Spider-Man. And there's a large group of people who loved the Venom movies (I personally think they're awful but whatever) and decided to give Morbius a chance.

 

[psylockolussus]

This was an obvious flop.

Now lets see how The Flash, Blue Beetle and Aquaman will do later this year.

Shazam! will probably be done in a long while after this just like Black Adam.

 

[Moncton]

I probably would have not made a sequel without Black Adam, but if you're going to, why not focus on the family aspect (both the film and the marketing) to differentiate it in the marketplace? Call it Shazam Family instead of the horrible generic title, and really market it as a family film.

 

[Rijowhi]

Such a shame that this film looks like it’s going to flop. The family and I really enjoyed the movie. In fact I think it’s my favourite DC movie since Man of Steel!

A far better watching experience than the somewhat pathetic Black Adam.

 

[Iceman]

Was projected to open with 85M owrldwide and the first movie had a 155M worldwide opening.

Damn, didn’t realise it was such a drop worldwide. Pretty crazy.

 

[kguillou]

This isn't a flop guys, this is a Fant4stic level disaster. People just straight up did not care to watch this thing at all.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

^ fair... but from the people who did see it, I haven't heard anything that bad

I think people were more turned off by the behind the scenes drama then the actual movie itself

which is where it differs from Morbius/Fant4stic level movies

this was at least a palatable film

rather it didn't meet people expectations of what they wanted maybe is a different story

 

[DyeLorean]

^ fair... but from the people who did see it, I haven't heard anything that bad

Because I think is just one of those movies that people do want to see but aren't exactly rushing to see on the big screen, specially when there are better things to see or are coming up (John Wick 4). I bet is going to have very good numbers once it hits streaming services.

 

[MaceB]

He is not keeping Gadot and that has been obvious for a while. People read way to much into cameos.

So we’re gonna have a peacemaker 2 in a different universe but all the same actors? That’s confusing and a recipe for failure. More of the same lazy thinking on the behalf of WB. Shut every post flash project down. Start up from scratch. Taking this approach where they try to retain the good bits they have while restarting the bad wreaks of box office based decision making, so transparent that it’d be insulting to audiences IMO.

 

[Iceman]

How does DC manage to screw up sequels to films that were actually successful for them (WW84 and now this)? Aquaman 2 is supposedly another one.

I get the feeling they’re sort of giving up with Aquaman 2, and 84 was a huge disappointment for me. We had TDK, one of the best ever sequels from DC. The DCEU they just couldn’t get any franchise properly off the ground with consecutive good films. I believe Reeves will be able to fix that, even it doesn’t help the DCU.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

How does DC manage to screw up sequels to films that were actually successful for them (WW84 and now this)? Aquaman 2 is supposedly another one.

A good question.

Maybe some directors just get lucky the first time and the same tricks dont work again. That seems to be the case with a lot of these films.

A good point...

I think in the case of WW, Shazam and AQ it was kind of lucky the originals did well and should have been treated as such. They were the proof that Warner's idea of letting the director control the story (unlike Di$ney/Marvel who control the tone and style) was a great plan because each put their stamp on the film and they knew this might be their one shot at films like this so they put their entire soul into it. Problem is, it worked and WB then let them also do that for the sequels which they were not prepared for. Not unlike when a band finally gets their break and all their hard work goes into their one big chance to hit it big and the record explodes. The follow up is almost always a disappointment.

... And another

 

[SomeOldGuy]

Usually if I go see something that’s getting critically panned and I like it, I can still see where the critics are coming from. Quantumania is a good recent example. I had fun with it, but I could see what the problems with the film were.

This tho? Total disconnect. This movie is ****ing awesome. Every critic who gave this a rotten ought to be stuffed into a cannon and shot into the sun. Wildly fun, wildly creative and as full of heart as the firm film. Also damn funny. There were about 20 people in my theater and there were multiple laugh out loud moments, and no one got out of their seats until after the first post credit scene.

It’s too bad no one is seeing this in theaters thanks to all the crap reviews. 9/10, will be buying the blu ray to go with the blue ray of the first one on my slhelf.

 

[Kane52630]

 

[Kane52630]

 

[Kane52630]

 

[FunkMiller]

Obviously, there's a very strong argument that they *should* have shelved this movie, the same way they did with Batgirl.

If Flash and Aquaman lose money as well, the decision to let the DCEU limp towards death, instead of killing it properly, will likely haunt WB until the next inevitable buyout.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Obviously, there's a very strong argument that they *should* have shelved this movie, the same way they did with Batgirl.

If Flash and Aquaman lose money as well, the decision to let the DCEU limp towards death, instead of killing it properly, will likely haunt WB until the next inevitable buyout.

Batgirl got shelved because they were able to get a write off on it before that write off expired. I don't think that option is there for them with these movies which have much more money invested in them.

 

[FunkMiller]

Batgirl got shelved because they were able to get a write off on it before that write off expired. I don't think that option is there for them with these movies which have much more money invested in them.

If the film come in under 150 million worldwide (quite possible now) they would have done better to shelve it anyway, not spend any money on the marketing, and take a similar financial hit to the one they are going to take anyway.

 

[Kane52630]

They couldn't write it off because it was supposed to be in the theaters. And the theater chains would never allow it to be shelved because they need the business and would have sued WB. It was easy for Batgirl because that was an HBO Max property.

 

[FunkMiller]

They couldn't write it off because it was supposed to be in the theaters. And the theater chains would never allow it to be shelved because they need the business. It was easy for Batgirl because that was an HBO Max property.

What a stupid mess.

WB needed someone with balls to cut this thing off at the knees a long time ago - before all of these points became an issue.

 

[Kane52630]

No because that's not how business works.

 

[FunkMiller]

No because that's not how business works.

Successful businesses know when to cut and run when they have to. WB should have done this two years ago +.

 

[Kane52630]

Successful businesses know when to cut and run when they have to. WB should have done this two years ago +.

They didn't have to since the first Shazam made money and had great reviews... but apparently, you know all. lol

 

[kguillou]

I mean, I dont think we need to start saying "this should have never been greenlit to begin with!!" guys. The first one was a modest hit, critics really liked it and so did most fans. It had the POTENTIAL to be something bigger, they just fumbled the execution in the follow up, plain and simple.