The Flash Bombs while the MCU and Disney Continue to Struggle

It's no surprise that The Flash has bombed, although how badly it's failed is a surprise (losing to discount Spider-Man is pretty sad). Flash will still speed past a few benchmarks, as it has cleared Sony bomb Morbius as well as DC bomb Shazam 2. Will it make Dungeons & Dragons money (208)? I think so, but it's still going to be one of the biggest bombs of all time because of its ludicrous budget (officially 220, but believed to 300) and save us from Ezra Miller in the future (who also serves as a convenient scapegoat for the film, but is not the only problem). If there's a specific lesson to be learned it's that memberberries don't work without a strong foundation (either of prior success or the film itself)--while the MCU is busy destroying itself, it still has three Phases of success to reflect on (consider how long it took Star Wars to die when that franchise hasn't had a great film since 1981). The only positive for DC going forward is the film has no relevance to whatever James Gunn is planning, but it does mean Blue Beetle will likely get pulverized Shazam-style when it comes out (Aquaman 2 should do better, despite Amber Heard's inclusion).

Since Bob Iger's return, Disney has been firing people (7,000 jobs, cf) and those cuts have included several prominent folks (Susan Arnold, CFO Christine McCarthy, etc), the biggest being the firing Victoria Alonso (despite triple protection: female, Latina, and a lesbian--a win for equality as she too can get fired for incompetence). We've now had another 'name' of sorts receive similar treatment, as Chief Diversity Officer Latondra Newton (who also checks three boxes) was fired (she's supposedly behind the race swaps in The Little Mermaid and others, although I doubt Newton is the true cause of that). None of this implies a major creative shift at Disney because BlackRock is still their biggest shareholder (although others do see a change; [it is amusing to see BlackRock CEO Larry Fink giving up the label ESG now that the public is aware of it--so not the policies it advocates, but the label]). My belief is that these sacrifices are being made to point the blame at someone other than Bob Iger.

Speaking more broadly, let's take a look at recent Disney Films (estimated losses noted below are via Deadline; brackets compare it to its predecessor factoring inflation; the slash is domestic/foreign)

2022

• May - MCU Doctor Strange 2 955 (411/544) < 2016 film 826 (+129) - budget c.200
• June - Lightyear 226 (118/108) < 2019 film 1.228 (-1.002) - lost c.105 million
• July - MCU Thor 4 760 (343/417) < 2017 film 1.02 (-260) - budget c.250
• Nov - MCU Black Panther 2 859 (453/405) < 2018 film 1.573 (-714) - budget c.250
• Nov - Strange World 73 (37/35) - lost c.200 million

2023

• Feb - MCU Ant-Man 3 476 (214/261) < 2018 film 725 (-249) - budget c.200
• May - MCU Guardians 3 824 (347/476) < 2017 film 1.052 (-228) - budget c.250
• May - Little Mermaid 477 (264/213) < 1989 film 518 (-41) - budget c.250
• June - Elemental 68 (52/16) - budget c.200

None of this includes after market numbers (DVD/streaming) or toy sales, all of whose modern iterations are dwarfed by their prior predecessor (Frozen seems to be the only recent IP that still pushes merch).

As for the box office MCU trends: 955-760-859-476-822; all the films are sequels and have varying degrees of memberberries; two (Strange and Ant-Man) were heavily connected to Disney+ shows (clearly of no importance); at least three of the five MCU films were subject to emergency re-shoots (Strange, Black Panther, and Ant-Man). From these IP virtually none of the classic characters are coming back: no Guardians (or James Gunn), no Thor, etc. Of those that remain, Hulk and Hawkeye have already passed the torch to irrelevant or disliked spinoff characters. There's no positives to derive from any of this and no sign of anything good forthcoming (very much like where DC has been since 2008's The Dark Knight).

As for the non-Marvel stuff, it's been god awful. Pixar and Disney animation are completely lost, having lost an atrocious amount of money (Onward 142, Soul 121, Luca 50, and Turning Red 20, were all abysmal failures, as were Raya 130 and Encanto 256). The formula in all of them has been the much like the MCU: terrible writing with combative marketing--a rainbow coloured shit sandwich. The major difference between these projects and the MCU above (given that the quality and approach is similar), is because of its continuity, the MCU has a lot of goodwill to carryover from prior efforts, whereas these fresh IP have to stand on their own. The corporate media has finally started to say 'no' to some of this, but in a very limited, tepid way (they gave Willow a free pass), looking for technical excuses rather than the turgid base of this garbage. I don't see how Disney can change at this point, but I do think they will make things cheaper.

Back to Marvel, Namor star Tenoch Huerta has now been accused of sexual assault. This hasn't gone to court, so we don't know what's happened. However, unlike with Kang, this isn't a big deal for the MCU, as Black Panther 2 disappointed and no one was clamouring for more Namor anyway. They can easily recast the character (they probably should have regardless) and move on.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Concerns about Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty DLC

I haven't posted anything about Cyberpunk 2077 since December, 2020 (other than referencing it's highly successful animated spinoff, Cyberpunk: Edgerunners, which I enjoyed and wasn't crippled by ESG restrictions, as we'll discuss below). That doesn't mean I haven't written about it, but that I never got around to finishing my review (whose inchoate state is nowhere near my Last of Us Part II review). As for the experience, I really enjoyed the game at launch (you can watch that playthrough here) and I've re-played the game many times. As good as it is (the best RPG of the last few years), it's not as good as Witcher 3 (which I first played in 2016; I have a playthrough of it from two years ago posted).  When comparing the two I'm primarily talking about its story, since that's what matters to me most. Now that we're near the release of the game's one and only DLC (September 26) I'm interested to see what we're getting from CDPR beyond simply a gameplay overhaul. On the surface there are reasons to be concerned that no one seems to be discussing, so let's go over it.

Modern storytelling (film, TV, etc) has fallen into a political mire making it predictable and boring. CDPR accepts ESG scores because they want the funding associated with it (cf), so have restrictions imposed on how they want to make their games (if unfamiliar, this and this gives you some perspective--in essence, it's a soulless corporation using virtue signaling to deflect from how it makes its money). Now that we know our entertainment is tainted by ESG, the old chestnut about 'creative decisions' and 'looking for a new audience' is exposed as a lie: they have no choice, so there's nothing creative about it. The signs of this in Phantom Liberty are painfully obvious, even if the veneer is easier to disguise in this setting than something like the Witcher:

• Girl Boss (the president and presumably Songbird)
• Evil White Man (the leader of the evil faction)
• POC bad ass (Idris Elba and presumably Songbird)

If this was ten years ago these elements could have occurred organically and would be much less cliche, but we now know the marching orders CDPR gets by participating in ESG, so that's the 'why' of these choices (this is also clear in the base game). The absurdity of using this straightjacket can be seen in real world examples: OceanGate (of the missing submarine) didn’t want to hire any experienced “50 year old white guys” because they weren’t “inspirational”. Video games are less serious than subs, but it's still a ridiculous way to operate (is writer Pawel Sasko in danger of not being 'inspirational'?). On the creative side, the problem with adhering to this approach is there's no mystery or intrigue because good and bad are dictated by ethnicity, gender, and orientation. Can you make a palatable story with these restrictions?

The simple answer is 'yes, but', since Cyberpunk 2077 is a good game, but not a great game (with those flaws less obviously impacted by ESG). On the surface (the preview etc) the warning signs aren't as glaring as The Last of Us Part II or Rings of Power or She-Hulk. Some of that is helped because V isn't a pre-determined character (although clearly they used female-V for ESG reasons, albeit they've tweaked how they've shown her vs 2020--I still prefer the original version). Because V is the player, the majority of the player base (white men) aren't automatically denigrated and emasculated simply for existing--all that hatred can be safely directed towards the enemy faction (Woodman and Fingers are the most despicable characters in the base game, lest we forget, and the least sympathetic gang--Maelstrom--are anomalously white).

That aside, my guess is the writers of the DLC will make things ambiguous (otherwise their story has no weight). White man bad, yes, but there will be some sort of qualification (maybe he had an absent or violent father--which is very ESG--just like Jackie); Girl Boss is a bad ass, but there will be moral ambiguity (maybe she's unethical, like Elizabeth Peralez); POC bad ass is awesome, but he has issues (like Saul); and so on. That approach would match what we sometimes see in the base game (like with Claire). This is the only way to successfully navigate ESG restrictions and make it appealing to players. If I'm wrong about this ambiguity, the DLC will be a massive disappointment in terms of story.

Would I rather CDPR not involve themselves in this nonsense and just make creative decisions like they did in the Witcher franchise? Of course, but like the good capitalists they are, money matters more than ethics. One hopes the financial disasters that have afflicted Disney and others will encourage the company to change, but I have my doubts. BlackRock's Faustian bargain is simply too tempting not to take, whatever the risk (we know how they'd resolve Hearts of Stone, clearly). What I'm interested to see is how CDPR navigates this with the Witcher IP (both sequels and remakes)--I don't think they can make it work and clearly ignored those elements from the Netflix show in their update. In the meantime, let's hope the DLC is well done despite the restrictions.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Qualifying the Success of Guardians 3 and Into the Spider-Verse 2, Plus MCU Delays

I call things out when I'm right and when I'm wrong and we have an example of each to go over. Let's start where I was wrong: Guardians 3 looked like it would fall well short of Thor 3 (760 million) after an anemic opening, but it currently stands at 808 million, putting it ahead of both Thor 3 and the first film of the series (in 2023 dollars the original Guardians made 989.8 million, just for perspective). The third installment won't catch Guardians 2 (869, or 1.078 in 2023 dollars), so while the film is not a failure, it underperformed. Like all MCU films from Phase Four onward, it held fairly well domestically, but unlike most others it hasn't failed internationally (Fast X is the opposite of the MCU, doing extremely well internationally, but failing domestically). What success the MCU (and Sony) have had relies on memberberries, albeit that doesn't help anything going forward because those elements won't be returning.

As for where I was right, that's The Little Mermaid (currently at 422 million). It's strongest domestically (where the appetite for this approach is strongest), but the overall take is unimpressive (it has no hope of catching the anemic Ant-Man 3). There's limited appetite for this kind of film and even domestically it's nowhere near something like 2017's Frozen 2. Overall, less people are going to see these films, so the industry trails far behind pre-pandemic numbers. You'd think this kind of failure would involve some soul searching and a change in approach, but there's no sign of that. Perhaps the situations of Bud Light, Target, etc (even court cases like this) will make an impact and help the industry turn away from toxic ESG approaches (eg). If the MCU brand gets attacked, Disney would be in even greater financial trouble than it already is.

A reminder for this discussion: quality is not what makes a film successful. I saw the latest Jurassic Park last year and it was terrible, but it made a ton of money (just over a billion--spectacle can win out). What's turning people off isn't strictly the quality of the film, but the obvious and toxic marketing and messaging.

I was curious how Into the Spider-Verse 2 would do (As I've said repeatedly over the years, the hype for the first isn't backed by numbers--just 384 at the time, or 464 in today's dollars), so I wondered what would happen five years later after an endless sea of positive coverage. The expectation that the domestic audience would show up has largely proven true (240), but thus far the foreign gross has been awful (88; it echoes Cocaine Bear's domestic/foreign percentages). I have no interest in Miles Morales (sequel characters whose raison d'etre is inclusivity are derivative--what creators should do is create an engaging original character or IP), but I'm curious about popular taste. The film saw a sharp drop last Friday (68%), but had a Guardians-like hold on the weekend proper (43-44%). I don't think the appetite for the IP is strong (it hasn't had any serious competition at the box office yet). The big question is: can it make an impact internationally and, if not, is the domestic market enough? This was not a cheap movie to make so I don't think so. Right now there's a lot of talk of a sequel and spinoffs, but the latter never happened after the first film because of the weak box office, so I think we're on a similar trajectory here (cf Sony's trend of announcing and then deleting projects--announcements are free and pre-production is cheap, but making a film costs money).

The Titanic now known as the MCU has announced a number of date changes for upcoming projects (related, at least in theory, with the writer's strike) and I want to focus on those that are significant:

• Thunderbolts - July to December 2024; yet another IP no one asked for or wants (filled with characters no one likes except, perhaps, John Walker, cf); the change gives it more time for reshoots (aka: add a few jokes)
• Blade - September, 2024 to February, 2025; an expected delay given all the script problems; I'm still expecting it to be a handoff of the moniker to a younger, female character
• Fantastic Four - February to May 2025; creates more time to make it palatable (jokes!), but I'm not expecting any meaningful difference from the steaming pile of Phase Four
• Avengers 5 & 6 - to May, 2026 and May, 2027; as above (re-casting Kang if need-be, cf)

Deadpool 3 was moved up six months in 2024, giving it a better release slot (May), something easier to do since the film is less effects heavy and more self-contained. I'm not expecting much from it, as I thought Deadpool 2 was substantially worse than the original and that trend is likely to continue given the horrendous state of the MCU (cf). Ryan Reynolds signed a five-film deal with Marvel and that clock is ticking, but clearly they want his film to debut before he pops up elsewhere. One wonders if Reynolds' appearances will drag on into irrelevancy like Ben Affleck's in the DCEU.

Like most sane people I don't pay much attention to John Campea (despite his long presence within the community as a commentator). Because of that, it's only now that I've learned he gave up on his public talk show (putting it behind a paywall and firing his two co-hosts; this happened about two months ago) and is mostly posting shorter content. He justified the change because he's losing money (which in a ranting video claims he doesn't need--pick a lane John (cf; he's deleted the original so we're stuck with those that comment on it). His video views have dropped well below that of his competitors. This downward trend is a result of him being a soulless corporate cheerleader--a job anyone, including ChatGPT, can easily do (cf), and not content anyone struggles to find. Campea is on the fast train to obsolescence, but I doubt he'll disappear entirely (many of his less popular friends are still hanging on at the margins of YT; hell, even Matt Jarbo is still around and that's after being exposed for mass flagging other channels). As I mentioned about a year and a half ago, the cultural pendulum is swinging away from Campea and while that doesn't mean similar people won't enjoy a level of success, it does mean there's a ceiling on their popularity.

There was a lot of reader interest in my previous Robert E. Howard IP article, for which I'm thankful (more than the Conan article that preceded it). No doubt the fact no one else was talking about it helps.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Developments with Robert E. Howard IP other than Conan (Solomon Kane, Dark Agnes, Kull, Valeria, etc)

In the free preview of Titan's upcoming Conan comic there's an illustration of Robert E. Howard IP (above) that indicates an underlying hope to see them receive similar treatment (as, indeed, was attempted at Marvel a few years ago). I wanted to look at what's presented and think about what has potential to succeed. I am a fan of Howard's, but I don't have encyclopedic knowledge of his voluminous writings. What I'm familiar with are his Conan stories (which I've re-read recently), his horror stories (read long ago), the author himself, and a small smattering of things outside of that (mostly read long ago). I have not read the lauded 70s comics (before my time), so my exposure in that format is only via Marvel's recent output (mostly mediocre). I've seen both the 80s films featuring Conan (as well as the terrible Red Sonya movie), but not in a long time.

It's interesting to see who is in this image, because many Howard characters are not. Here's the list in order from the illustration (Note: Howard's Picts are his own synthesis of Native Americans and a now-debunked view of the aboriginal peoples of Scotland; the colour coding: green=currently being published (book/comic) and pushed as a film/show; pink= published/produced after the Howard boom; orange=published during the Howard boom in the 70s/early 80s; red=only published during REH's lifetime or as part of the general publishing of all his unpublished work):

• Ace Jessel (1929; boxing) - There are just two stories and the sub-genre is so specific I'm lost on why he's included (REH had more popular boxing characters, see below)
• Valeria (1935; fantasy/Conan) - from the Conan story "Red Nails"; Marvel (2019) attempted a series by Meredith Finch (wife of the more notable David Finch), which is tedious and bland despite good art
• Grom (1934; fantasy/side character) - from "The Valley of the Worm"; the Pictish Grom interacts with the lead of that story (Niord); it's not clear why he's on this list and Niord is not (representation, perhaps?)
• Bran Mak Morn (1930; historical, Dark Ages) - A Pictish king facing off against Romans among other things (he also has a crossover with Kull, below); had a couple of pastiche novels written for him in 1976 and 1981 during the Howard boom, but other than some adaptations from Dark Horse has since been invisible
• Solomon Kane (1928; historical, 16th century) - the Puritan adventurer fighting evil; Dark Horse published a few mini-series' featuring him in the mid-2000s and there was the 2009 (2012 for Americans) film; more recently there was a planned show at Netflix, but that's been abandoned along with the Conan show
• Cormac Mac Art (1920s; historical, Dark Ages) - an Irish pirate whose stories were published posthumously and gave birth to a pastiche sequel series from Andrew Offutt from 1975-82 and one comic adaptation (from Dark Horse in 1990); there's room for pseudo-historical adaptations
• Wulfhere (1920s; historical/Cormac Mac Art) - His fate is tied to the above
• Kull (1929; fantasy) - from REH's fantastical pre-history, but from an earlier epoch than Conan; while a forerunner to the latter, he's not the same character; his last comic book adaptation was from IDW in 2017 via Tom Waltz, but it only lasted 3 issues; there was a 1997 film, but that was intended to be a Conan movie, so while its existence is interesting I wouldn't call it indicative of interest
• Conan (1932; fantasy) - I won't repeat what I've said in my prior article; the most well-known REH character
• Francis Xavier Gordon aka "El Borak" (1934; historical) - an Indiana Jones type character who, as far as I can tell, has had no resonance since; that said, romping adventures like this is a viable route for the future (especially after the Indiana Jones franchise killed itself)
• Wild Bill Clanton (1936; Western) - the lead in 'spicy' stories of the time (so some bare calves may have been shown); Westerns are essentially dead, so I'm not sure what you can do with him
• Esau Cairn (1939; Science Fiction) - the lead in "Almuric", there was a Dark Horse comic for it in 1991; as an Edgar Rice Burroughs-style adventure (its similar to A Princess of Mars, 1912) I think there's potential in it
• Turlogh Dubh O'Brien (1931; historical, 11th century) - Irishman whose stories sometimes have fantastical or horror elements; he's had no resonance since the Howard boom in the 1970s (like so many others, his stories were used as raw material for Conan), but there are some possibilities given that the era is popular
• Sonya of Rogatino (1934; historical, 16th century) - from the story "The Shadow of the Vulture" (she's not the lead character, as that's Gottfried Von Kalmbach); she feels very modern (almost cliche for female protagonists), which could be a good thing
• Sailor Steve Costigan (1929; boxing/historical, 1920s) - sailor and a boxer (this is not the character of the same name from "Skull Face"); more popular than Ace above, but it's difficult to see what could be done with the character
• 'Dark' Agnes de Chastillon (1932/34; historical, 16th century) - posthumously published in the 1970s, her stories are similar to Sonya's above; plenty of fun to be had, although I think there are limits to what you can squeeze from historical adaptations; Marvel tried (2020) with a series by Becky Cloonan, but it only managed two issues with the same floompy writing seen in Belit and Valeria (above)--the Marvel iterations were disappointingly bland and indistinctive
• Breckinridge Elkins (1934; Western) - a humorous character, making the genre even more difficult to do anything with (Blazing Saddles was a long time ago); he was very popular at the time
• Brule (1929; fantasy/Kull) - a Pictish character I suspect is only here as an echo of that IP

Among those not included is the popular Conan character Belit ("Queen of the Black Coast", 1932), likely because the character does not survive her story and therefore is tricky to do anything significant with. Despite that, Poul Anderson's Conan the Rebel (1980) features her and Marvel tried to do something with her in 2019, but writer Tini Howard missed the point and turned her into a generic Girl Boss which (like Valeria above) only lasted five issues. She is hardly the only character not included, as Howard had so many (James Allison, Dennis Dorgan, Pike Bearfield, Cormac Fitzgeoffrey, Lal Singh, Black Vulmea, John Kirowan, Steve Harrison, De Montour the werewolf, and on and on).

Our list includes 18 characters representing 15 different IPs that can be organized by genre (with El Borak covering two of those):

• Historical: 8 (Dark Ages: Bran, Cormac/Wulfhere; 11th: O'Brien; 16th: Solomon, Sonya, Agnes; Early Modern: El Borak, Steve)
• Fantasy: 3 (Conan/Valeria, Kull/Brule, Grom)
• Boxing: 2 (Ace and El Borak)
• Western: 2 (Clanton and Elkins)
• Science Fiction: 1 (Cairn)

Historical fiction has its place and continues to have resonance on screen, but so much of the modern genre has a heavy emphasis on romance (is there any production about English royalty that isn't a romance?), which doesn't suit Howardian IP. What these need to stand out is a supernatural/fantastic element (which some already include, like Solomon Kane). Beyond that is what time periods attract the public. Vikings remain popular (which covers three of the IP), and Agnes' story crosses paths with the always popular Henry VIII; Bran faces off against Romans (also popular). I believe an Indiana Jones-style approach could work, which El Borak could be used for. As for poor Sonya, as modern as she seems, I don't think there's an appetite for the once popular Muslim Ottoman vs Christian Europe narrative.

The fantasy IP are all solid as-is, even though I remain puzzled by Grom's inclusion without his lead character and why that specific story was picked. For the other two, while Kull inspired Conan, they are different enough to not cause confusion. Ironically, despite the plethora of modern fantasy shows and films, nothing has worked since the early seasons of Game of Thrones, leaving plenty of room for it to be done right (and action-oriented fantasy hasn't been done properly since the 1980s).

I don't see any room for boxing stories (it's simply too niche) and Westerns are functionally dead (one-offs aren't impossible). On the flipside, there's an appetite for an SF story like Cairn's, which the poorly made John Carter botched over a decade ago.

What do I think will happen? Some of that depends on how well the Conan comic (and film, should it happen) performs. I'd expect Titan to do what Marvel tried and take shots at some of the other IP, beginning with those with resonance after the Howard boom (and leaving the possibility of some creative wanting to take a stab at something more obscure). Solomon Kane seems to be at the forefront of what's being pushed, which is understandable as it would be very easy to connect him to Dark Agnes and Sonya as they occupy the same eras. Beyond that it's difficult to say. I'd keep an eye out for new pastiches (like the S. M. Stirling Conan novel) and any further comic announcements as clues for what else might be in store. It's too bad streaming services won't make this kind of IP, as I think much of it is well-suited to TV.

This article was written by Peter Levi