MCU, DCEU, and Fantasy Entertainment News & Commentary

As expected, neither Black Adam or Wakanda Forever will be released in China. This is by-rote for the MCU at this stage and becoming so for the DCEU--if you aren't going to make your films specifically for the PRC, you aren't getting access to its markets. I don't think Wakanda Forever would have performed particularly well in China regardless, but it could have boosted Black Adam towards breaking even. This, along with losing the much smaller Russian market (due to the war in Ukraine), and some Middle Eastern markets unless LGBTQ content is edited out, means films like this must hit their box office targets elsewhere.

Speaking of the box office for both projects, Black Adam is going to lose money for WB--this is not a big surprise, since its test screenings scored even worse than the cancelled Batgirl. Predictions that Wakanda Forever would bomb also seem true, although it could break even financially (it's only hit 552 through its first two weekends).

It's difficult to fully express the hilarity of Bob Iger returning to Disney to fix Bob Chapek's mess. As most of you know, all the current projects were made under Bob Iger's watch. Whether Chapek was ever going to fix it is an open question, but there was no possibility of him making it worse. Chapek's efforts have never been felt by Marvel, so all Iger can do is reverse his changes to Star Wars and permanently kill the brand (maybe we will get a film from Harvey Weinstein's complicit assistant--yay?). What will Iger do? I have no idea, but it does mean we have to question Kamran Pasha's long contention that Chapek was playing 4D chess and is a Machiavellian mastermind. I have a feeling that, in time (if not already), Pasha will claim it was Susan Arnold who was the master and Chapek just a puppet.

Feige acolyte Nate Moore stated the obvious that the MCU deliberately seeks out creatives who are not familiar with the source material (thus the hilarious behind-the-scenes special for She-Hulk where one of the producers had no idea Daredevil was blind). Moore's cluelessness is not new, but having him admit it publicly is a delightful self-own. These efforts would have occurred after Ike Perlmutter and the Marvel story group was pushed out part way through Phase Three (after Doctor Strange). The wretched state of MCU projects from non-fans has made no impact on Moore, Victoria Alonso, or Feige, whose egos are too large to accept failure. With Iger back in the saddle they are likely safe for a few more years--enough time to completely run the brand into the ground.

The audience the MCU has been chasing hardest with Phase Four is Gen-Z (1995-2015). A huge part of their female-centric/diversity focused brand is targeted at them, but at least through 2021 we know this has completely failed. Halfway through Phase Four only 9% of the audience is into Marvel, a brand that leans heavily on Millennials (which fits my anecdotal experience).

I thought Blood Origin was DOA when it was announced--anything coming from the creative mind of Lauren Hissrich had no chance of succeeding (ahem, Jessica Jones season two). The show's trailer came out about a week ago and understandably got ratioed, looking like a bad Rings of Power ripoff. God love Michelle Yeoh, but she's 60-years old and the market for geriatric sword swingers is non-existent (nor does she have pull as an actor when you look at her films). Naturally nothing from the show resembles the source material (Polish/Slavic culture is irrelevant to the entertainment industry). My hope is it bombs horrendously to speed up the removal of the IP from Netflix's incompetent clutches, although I expect it to review well and Netflix to find a way to trumpet its initial numbers.

One of the reasons I have to look at alternative news sources is because official channels are unreliable (they owe their access to the corporations making these products). A good example of this comes from Indiana Jones 5, a film that has had a long and troubled production history, anchored by the laughable Indiana Jones 4. I like the first two films from the IP, but I'm not a hardcore fan, so I have only passively paid attention to news about it. What brings it to mind is director James Mangold humiliating himself by going full She-Hulk in attacking someone he hates online (oddly, the same one targeted by Jessica Gao, namely YTer Doomcock). In this case Mangold wound up with egg all over his face because he got caught in a lie. The point of this isn't Mangold or a Youtuber, but simply that fan channels do get scoops sometimes and those are often uncomfortable truths about an upcoming project (The Last of Us Part 2 is one of the many examples, where playtesters leaked how awful it was). As for the film itself, I never expected it to do well--the fourth film occurred in a different era and is terrible and the third film, even older, has plenty of issues. Much like The Terminator or Alien, some projects don't need more than one sequel (if that).

Shortly after Twitter fired close to 4,000 people (prompting legal inquiries), Facebook let go 12,000, Disney is planning its own layoffs (Iger may prevent that--we shall see), and Amazon is cutting 10,000 jobs. All of this comes during the current recession, but other than Amazon the reason for these layoffs is quite different (FB's bungling of the Metaverse is at the core of its struggles; Disney because of Iger's unending stupidity; Musk simply cut anyone who either opposed him or didn't serve a direct functional purpose--close to 90% of employees apparently, with no noticeable effect on the platform).

I'd be remise if I didn't mention Twitter's apparent death...or not. It's not long ago I had people telling me it was doomed--everyone was leaving--and instead usage is up and CBS embarrassed itself by leaving and returning in record time. Whatever you think of the platform or its current boss, it's still the only central place for news. Places like Instagram and Tiktok aren't set-up to fulfill that function, FB failed at it years ago, Mastodon doesn't want peasants polluting its safe space (RIP Will Wheaton, cf), and so on. This is a lesson Trump learned when he was booted and created his own version of the platform--it's just another Mastodon with a different political leaning.

I have a bunch of video game news I want to get into (Witcher 4, Dragon Age 4, Mass Effect 4--if it has a 4 in the title we're good apparently), but I'll save that until next time.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Fantasy and Science Fiction TV/Movie News/Commentary

I made a comment last time that Henry Cavill returning as Superman likely meant an end to his time with The Witcher. I made that statement not because it's impossible for Cavill to do both, but because I believed he would want out of The Witcher after its disastrous second season (the first isn't great either, but there was hope it could improve)--we now know it was a struggle just to get him back for the third season (cf). My prediction that he'd leave proved correct and it's clear Cavill exited The Witcher months before the official announcement (allowing Netflix time to recast him). While a fourth season was announced (with Liam Hemsworth as Geralt), if season three bombs Netflix can easily walk away. Indeed, as I was predicting long before this news came out, I expect all related Witcher IP to bomb henceforth due to the terrible writing.

The end of the IP on Netflix is the best thing for the franchise. The first season did all it could do by exposing non-gamers to the series, but there's no positive impact left to come from it (there was no meaningful bump from either the animated show or season two). I don't think an end to The Witcher will impact how Netflix approaches IP, other than reinforcing that established actors are required for success, even if they don't guarantee it (ahem, Rings of Power).

I don't understand the unabashed enthusiasm for James Gunn being anointed as the co-runner of the new DCEU regime. As I've said before, I think the praise he receives for the first Guardians is overblown (the story beats come from the original writer), the second Guardians is a mess (still funny, but poorly paced with failed emotional beats), and The Suicide Squad completely bombed (the ultimate fail for a comedy: it was boring). I'm aware that Peacemaker has had some success on streaming, but the reception is muted compared to behemoths like Stranger Things. If Gunn had never been fired from Marvel I don't think he would have saved Phase Four (I hear the opposite hypothesis all the time), which makes me ask what is really changing at WB? That's not to say I don't understand the PR win, since Gunn is personally quite popular. His co-runner, Peter Safran, has unremarkable credits, so while I understand elation in escaping the past regime, the proof of their positive change will be in the pudding.

It has leaked that the MCU is planning for X-Men swaps (of race at least). if true this isn't a shock, given Phase Four, but it is interesting because scooper Mikey Sutton has said for years that we were going to get a faithful adaptation of the IP (cf). In his version, this iteration would heavily feature a (on-paper) male cast. So why make the changes when there are a ton of POC X-Men characters? Because by swapping Marvel doesn't have to pay original creators, and that financial incentive is a big part of why comic adaptations are so swap-happy. Personally, I wouldn't do swaps unless there's an impactful story reason to do so (I think tokenism is pernicious). With that said, I don't think whatever these swaps are (if they happen) will be why the MCU's iteration fails, as abysmal writing is the true root cause. For those who don't know, as a comic reader I was primarily an X-Men fan (cf and cf), so if I see the train wreck coming I won't be watching the film.

One other interesting tidbit that came out of this leak is that, for Disney, they 'count' Latinos as white when considering diversity in projects. This is not done to hurt Latino representation (Victoria Alonso, who is part of that community, is hardly going to work against it), but to reduce the number of white characters.

Speaking of adaptations, I'd be remiss if I didn't briefly discuss one of the major issues Rings of Power and any other adaptors of Tolkien have: the man himself. What I mean by that is showrunners and directors are rarely academics (and even less likely to be among the most esteemed in their field), unlikely to be war veterans (and even when they are, it's not of the kind of war Tolkien fought in or the subsequent one he lived through), unlikely to be religious (as Tolkien deeply was), unlikely to be familiar with the ancient historic material that inspired him, and finally none will be philologists. This puts any creator at a tremendous disadvantage tackling his material, being far more daunting than the much simpler material from most other fantasy authors. One of Tolkien's talents was in creating a narrative that could be enjoyed  by those who didn't share his particular set of beliefs. The story also contains challenging philosophical ideas (such as the nature of Evil; cf Tom Shippey's The Road to Middle-earth) that helps the work stick with you. Tackling material like this is far too much to ask of the hacks now writing modern entertainment, but even well-meaning auteurs from an earlier era (like Peter Jackson) struggled with it (and there's some irony in Jackson failing with the much simpler The Hobbit--it's no surprise that the trilogy with fewer changes was more successful).

Dovetailing back to Rings of Power: a rumour from Chris Gore (cf) claims the hapless showrunners will be replaced (perhaps remaining in the writer's room), an action an unnamed source says has to wait until after award season, which seems likely to me (if it happens). Beyond this, Nerdrotic is saying he's heard we're in for a complete reboot of the show. I find this latter claim highly unlikely, since there doesn't seem to be enough time to re-write the scripts, re-cast, and so forth. It's the only approach that could work, but I don't think Amazon would be willing to go that far. Regardless, I think it will be months before we find out just what's truly in store for Rings of Power.

I'm not surprised Black Adam bombed (321 million almost three weeks in). It was a DC character I'd never heard of with a star whose personal popularity isn't enough to create box office success arriving in the face of many DC failures (particularly Shazam, which bombed even harder). Broadly I don't think this matters--the project pre-dates the current regime at WB and its only purpose now is to bring Henry Cavill back as Superman (something that seems to have had no impact on its ticket sales). At 50, Dwayne Johnson is too old to be Black Adam for long. The film coming out is surreal, ala Channing Tatum's Gambit hitting theaters. I have no idea what Johnson was hoping to do back when he became interested in the role in 2007, but I know its not what's in theaters right now.

What's the forecast for Wakanda Forever? Limp marketing hasn't helped, but what are the numbers? Predictions over the last week have dropped 15%, lending some credence to the doubts from toy manufacturers I mentioned last time. You don't have to see the film to know it's going to be stuffed with Mary Sue's; a sympathetic (albeit baffling) antagonist in Namor (whose potentially interesting changes have been wasted--see the link above) and whose alterations lost Submariner fans; it's long (almost three hours); and lacks the lead actor. Phase Four's writing has been universally awful, so it's hard to expect something better from Joe Robert Cole. With that said, it ought to do better than Thor 4, but that's a low bar.

When Pitch Meeting is echoing what's being said by the Fellowship Youtube community, Marvel has reached a tipping point--even the normies are turned off by Phase Four's baffling approach. Good writing let's you get away with a lot of things people normally reject (by report, The House of the Dragon), but bad writing is a poison that kills franchises.

Unfortunately Netflix has renewed Sandman for another season. On the plus side, it took public begging from Neil Gaiman to make it happen, which means there is a bigger hill to climb for it to go beyond that (I can't see what meaningful changes could be made since Gaiman was already involved). This is one of the few big IP where no one I know has seen it or is talking about it (like Apple's Foundation), so I'm not sure what Netflix is hoping to achieve by bringing it back. I suppose the streaming service has to have some new content and one could argue it made a bigger splash than Rings of Power (cf).

In good news, the aforementioned Damon Lindelof Star Wars film is unlikely to ever appear. There are two theories about how the project leaked at all: Lindelof did it himself to diminish the impact of Alan Moore shitting all over his adaptation of Watchmen; or Kathleen Kennedy leaked it as petty rebellion against Disney CEO Bob Chapek telling her to stop announcing film projects that aren't assured production. Both theories are plausible, but not nearly as probable as the project never happening. At this stage I'd rather have Neil Breen make a Star Wars film.

Not long ago CDPR announced a remake of the original The Witcher video game that came out in 2007. Unlike with Naughty Dog and The Last of Us, this is not just a cash grab and from comments CDPR has made they aren't simply updating graphics (ala the Mass Effect remaster) and fixing the combat system. Since very few Witcher fans have ever played the game, a remake is a smart move and while the announcement is recent, I suspect the plan goes back months or years, receiving a sharp push forward when Cyberpunk 2077 initially failed to meet its targets. While Edgerunners has largely saved that IP, with the upcoming Witcher trilogy likely moving away from faithfulness (to meet representation quotas and so forth, meaning CDPR either ignores the lore and repopulates the north or shifts the starting geography, getting away from the setting that made the game popular), the remake is free to remain authentic within its proper Polish context. That means I don't think we'll get Eskel or Vesemir etc re-envisioned, and it's another chance for fans to be Geralt.

What this also means is that if the remake is successful, it will be very easy for CDPR to give Witcher 2 (2011) the same treatment within a couple of years, providing a steady diet of 'new' Geralt adventures and traditional content to go along with their new projects.

Watching the Twitter meltdown when Elon Musk took over has been highly entertaining. I don't share the messianic view that Musk is a genuine champion of free speech, but seeing a few Orwellian lunatics removed from their positions at the company was good for the soul. I know most people don't follow this kind of thing (wtf is BRICS, right?), but the incoherent meltdowns are great fun. I don't personally care if Twitter remains an important platform or not, but any pressure to make such platforms conform to the public square is welcome.

We all remember the Dave Chappelle controversy via the Netflix comedy special The Closer last year, and I was reminded of it when he was announced as hosting SNL recently (a show I think no one has watched since Bill Burr hosted it in 2020). At the time of The Closer a small group of Netflix employees threatened to quit and I was curious if any actually had. The answer is one, four months after the controversy--virtue signaling for the rest.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Comics, Fantasy, & Sci-Fi Film/TV News

It might seem cruel at this point to discuss the problems with Rings of Power, but Amazon's insufferable self-promotion and endless excuses eliminate any sense of pity. Despite the money and hype the show couldn't even beat Sandman's meagre social media impact which, while higher than the moribund She-Hulk (see below), is pathetic. RoP performed so poorly that even pro-corporate publications like Forbes have taken it to task. With the second season already filming there's no opportunity to change course, such that my prediction of superficial Witcher-like changes seems on-target (purely aesthetic; in many ways the shows are very similar, except one has Henry Cavill). In the aftermath the showrunners are pitching more action and more characters from the lore, but given how bad the action was in the current season and how horribly characters from the lore have been portrayed, that can't allay anyone's fears.

What does the show bombing mean? Publicly Amazon has denied it flopped, but the budget for season two has been slashed and we can assume internally Jeff Bezos wants someone's head to roll--many are hoping for Jennifer Salke (whose mess this is), but I think she's too well connected for that to happen. Changing showrunners is the only meaningful public change to make (which would be framed as wanting to spend more time with their family or pursue other interests), but that seems unlikely at this point. For now it seems like Bezos has chosen to eat the loss and push forward, presumably due to ego. [Right after I posted this, I saw rumours of a shadow showrunner being brought in.]

A bit of trivia: producer Lindsey Weber is married to Mike Weber, one of Wheel of Time's producers, perhaps explaining some of the similarities between the terrible fantasy shows (cheap costumes, awful writing, etc). We also know that the Finrod scenes were part of reshoots because Tom Budge was the original Finrod and these feature his replacement (Will Fletcher). Whether any of Fletcher's scenes were entirely new is less clear, but Budge did his career a favour by leaving.

Finally: I do know people who like the show (albeit not very many). These are broadly fantasy fans (which is to say, not book fans) who are unbothered by, for example, the terrible writing in The Witcher or The Wheel of Time. Their standard for genre fair seems to be: if it looks like fantasy, yay! Unfortunately for Amazon, such fans are few and far between and they are mostly outside the key demographic, instead appealing to older fans who, in small numbers, gravitate towards it (which mirrors the Phase Four audience for the MCU).

Speaking of Phase Four (whose nickname, Phase Bore, needs some work), Black Panther 2's box office is projected along the same path as the rest--a big opening followed by a sharp drop (estimated to earn half or less the original's gross). There's agitation from toy producers about losing a cash cow for boys with the absence of Black Panther (cf), as they don't believe the female leads answer that requirement or make up for it elsewhere (referencing the horrific sales of Phase Four merch other than Spider-Man).

Black Panther is ‘a very specific character’ whose ‘appeal is very ‘male’, even more than usual.’ This seems especially true with black men. Black men have the strongest relationship with the character, with an interesting, strong pop on the father/son dynamic. Black men identify with the Black King, strong male figure. Word association: noble strength. How the character holds himself. They admire that in the hero; inspiring to them. …seeing the movies was a great bonding [experience] for many black men and their sons. … Black men are even less likely to buy female-IP driven merch for either themselves or their sons.

Apparently Disney is pitching Storm as a way of ultimately solving that problem, but understandably the manufacturers don't agree (the binary of gendered toy sales, despite attempts to eliminate it, has not meaningfully changed).

She-Hulk is finally over (it's irrelevance with the public is dramatically illustrated by the Trends graph above, although critics continue to praise it unlike Rings of Power). There's not much left to say about the show, as the unfunny mess won't get a second season, allowing other writers to try and salvage the character in other projects (I doubt they can, but at least it's unlikely that Jessica Gao will be involved with her again--so many ex-Rick and Morty writers have shown themselves inept without Dan Harmon fixing their material). One of the funnier things about the show is that it's marketing was focused on guest stars rather than the titular hero, illustrating how little faith Disney had in the product. I also wonder how much it stings Feige and Victoria Alonso that the only Disney+ show getting a second season has a white male showrunner/writer (not that Michael Waldron has any talent) and a white male lead (Loki).

As for the show itself, other than further degrading Daredevil (what exactly he likes about She-Hulk is a mystery the show doesn't attempt to resolve--her desire for him seems to be all that matters--very Wonder Woman 84), I think the future for Matt Murdock will lean on his solo series (his role in Echo, which I expect to perform even more poorly than She-Hulk, won't matter). It's worth noting She-Hulk was written three years ago in a very different environment. Our present is in the midst of war, hyper inflation, an energy crisis, and political upheaval, such that a tale of She-Hulk's First World struggles of relationships and internet trolls doesn't cut it (the writers don't even understand bullying, which impacts the powerless, not invulnerable alcoholics). Whether this is the canary in the coal mine for Feige or not is difficult to say--if he learned nothing from The Eternals he's likely beyond the point of changing.

The Deadpool 3 announcement is a late, desperate decision echoing D23's sudden jettisoning of Phase Four for a Phase Five no one cares about either. Feige finally pulled the trigger on Hugh Jackman to reprise Wolverine, likely also caving into whatever demands Ryan Reynolds had that were preventing the film from hitting production. I don't think this guarantees Deadpool 3 will be good, as Deadpool 2 (which Reynolds controlled) was a poor sequel to Deadpool. Despite that, I think fans will show-up for Jackman, as the power of the memberberry is strong (that seems to be the one thing Feige took away from Far From Home--more memberberries!--albeit it did not work in Doctor Strange 2).

More broadly, MCU delays continue as the troubled Blade shifted over a year (Sept/23 to Nov/24), which is insane; Secret Wars moved back six months (Nov/25 to May/26), and Deadpool 3 (just announced) and Fantastic Four also moved a few months. Shuffling the schedule isn't new to Marvel, but has been particularly bad since Phase Four began (She-Hulk and Ms. Marvel are classic examples, as they swapped places then failed spectacularly). The changes represent the chaos going on internally. I think the reality of Phase Four's failure is dawning on them. The fly in the ointment for Marvel is that since Feige has had full control, the writing at Marvel has turned to utter shit, but I don't think there's awareness of that (Michael Waldron is still employed, after all).

My guess is that Mahershala Ali is trying to force Blade into being something other than a disaster--I think he's the reason why Stacey Amma Osei-Kuffour's moribund script was tossed (it wouldn't surprise me if he had it leaked). That said, replacing her with Beau DeMayo is not necessarily encouraging (Witcher and Moon Knight credits are worrying ahead of the animated X-Men '97, granting I was not a fan of the animated show it's borne from).

Speaking of DeMayo, the former Witcher writer happily threw his colleagues under the bus, proclaiming "Some of the writers were not or actively disliked the books and games (even actively mocking the source material). It’s a recipe for disaster and bad morale. Fandom as a litmus test checks egos, and makes all the long nights worth it. You have to respect the work before you’re allowed to add to its legacy." This is great to hear, but DeMayo's own episodes from the show is awful (especially "Kaer Morhen"), illustrating no respect for the source material, so we'll need him to put words into action before crediting him with sanity. That aside, Witcher has always been a disaster due to the writing (via the incompetent showrunner) and I firmly believe season three will be the end--Henry Cavill returning as Superman implies he's not putting aside time for the Netflix show.

It has been months since I wrote about Conan, but not that long for Red Sonja. Marketing for the latter has continued with on-set shots of the lead being released. Other than Matilda Lutz having red hair, there's nothing to be drawn from them (albeit for modern entertainment that in and of itself is a minor miracle). As for Conan, the news is confirmation that there is a showrunner for the Netflix project (why their identity is being kept under wraps, I have no idea, but presumably reflects a state of early pre-production). It's worth repeating that these two projects are completely unrelated due to the rights situation, so it's all but impossible for the two characters to meet on-screen.

I've heard Apple's adaptation of Isaac Asimov's Foundation series is a train wreck, but like most people I haven't seen it (no one is discussing it either). I read the original trilogy as a teenager and enjoyed it, but Apple hasn't made something people want to watch. Because of where it aired and its lack of impact, I don't think the result hurts the IP (unlike Amazon killing the Wheel of Time).

I haven't discussed Ezra Miller in awhile. The Flash star has pled not guilty to burglary charges and because Miller is both wealthy and has industry support (going to jail would jeopardize hundreds of millions of WB's money), I don't foresee jail time. I still think writing the actor out of the WB is in the cards, since who wants the headache, but until that happens the support will remain. Those rumours from the summer (cf) that Miller would not be returning as the Flash have popped up again--the substance is the same (insiders at WB say Miller is done), but presumably have reemerged due to the court proceedings.

I jumped off the Star Wars train a long time ago (Force Awakens was the final nail, with the prequels providing the rest), but it's interesting to see Andor suffering from the weight of prior failures. No one is watching the show, to the point that even the shills are discussing that reality. A prequel to a prequel for a franchise that hasn't done anything worth watching since 1983 did not appeal to anyone. I don't think this changes anything going forward, except lowering future budgets for whatever else is coming to Disney+. The just announced decision to bring in Damon Lindelof (!) illustrates LucasFilm still doesn't know what it's doing.

One of the reasons anime does so well is that it's not locked into the current Western political paradigm--writers are free to tell a good story. This is clearly seen in disasters like Cowboy Bebop, where American approaches were imposed. You can't make art or entertainment when your primary goal is pushing a message--that's just propaganda and people reject it even if they don't know why. We can see another example of this with The Woman King, which did the classic Hollywood thing of taking historical events and ignoring them for a message. In this case being caught proved disastrous, because Dahomey is a troubling African nation to depict positively. It's easy to imagine a Hollywood producer simply asking for African warrior women (perhaps inspired by the Dora Milaje from Black Panther) and not caring about specifics. Turns out both Africans and African-Americans were well-aware of that history and spoke out against it (including actors like Lupita Nyong'o), meaning the usual strategy of calling criticism racism/sexism couldn't work and the film bombed spectacularly (there's another related example of Latino's rejecting the invented 'Latinex' label). When will fans and creatives be freed from agenda-driven films? I have no idea.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Genre News (House of the Dragon, Sandman, She-Hulk, Rings of Power, Sony Marvel, and Fan-baiting)

Viewership for House of the Dragon has fallen since the premiere (being particularly low in the key 18-49 demographic), but beyond initial airing the numbers are holding up reasonably well (which is to say, people continue to come to the show throughout the week).With that said, the latter numbers are from HBO so have to taken with a grain of salt (the Nielsen numbers aren't remarkable, being well below things like Ozark, Reacher, Cobra Kai, etc), but if true the show has done a solid job of fan retention. I think it's benefiting in part from the ineptness of Rings of Power (see below), although there's still plenty of time for things to take a turn in either direction (particularly with the cast changes that are about to happen--both Milly Alcock and Emily Carey are departing). I've seen the first episode of the show, which I thought was adequate, but nowhere near the level of early GOT seasons and suffering from the preachiness of modern storytelling.

Sandman seems to be on the same path as Watchmen/Lovecraft Country: 'amazing viewership', but no season two. The cancellation rumours are being buoyed by comments from Neil Gaiman himself and we know Netflix inflated its numbers. If it's one-and-done, Sandman will be another example of "fan-baiting" failing (see below), with the fault here largely with Gaiman himself (who went through a similar process with American Gods and Good Omens), which echoes George R. R. Martin doing something similar with House of the Dragon. I have no attachment to the Sandman IP (I own a couple of the graphic novels, but I always thought they, like Gaiman's corpus overall, are highly overrated). If there's no second season that puts Gaiman in a tough spot, as he's running out of IP to adapt. The aforementioned American Gods failed (meaning its Amazon spinoff Anansi Boys can't get a boost from it), Good Omens was lackluster (it's strength coming from deceased co-author Terry Pratchett anyway), and his other IP are either building off someone else's work (often Alan Moore) or properties of limited interest or long since exploited (Neverwhere (96) and Stardust (07)). Sandman is what he's best known for, so if it dies that's his legacy kicked in the face by the audience.

She-Hulk has become the MCU Titanic as even the shills are jumping ship (it has the lowest viewership of any Disney+ show, echoing it's production troubles). Angry Joe, an early defender who made an ill-advised response video to criticism, has switched to hating the show, and even John Campea is admitting it's not very funny (claiming he's laughed five times through six episodes). The show has been accused of depicting catfishing uncritically (shades of Wonder Woman 1984 infamous rape situation), but without much hubbub because no one is watching. Phase Four's continued inability to navigate basic ethics boggles the mind. The negative feedback will likely only impact the showrunner and writers, as I expect plans for She-Hulk to continue forward regardless. While Feige seems incapable of discerning good writing from bad (thus continuing to give Michael Waldron work), failure to get certain numbers does mean oblivion--ergo, those involved with creating The Eternals are long gone.

It's come out that the entertainment industry is suffering from an assumption that core fans of an IP will show up no matter what's done with an IP (see below), such that the emphasis on adaptations is purely on expanding its appeal outside that market. There's some logic behind the idea, but the approach has been so poorly implemented (both in marketing and  execution), that not only are new audiences not showing up, but the existing audience isn't either. This has been exposed specifically at Marvel (and internally they are beginning to re-evaluate their strategy). At the MCU the belief is that memberberries (ala Spider-Man: No Way Home) are enough to placate the traditional audience, but using this approach has already failed with Star Wars (eg Kenobi and Boba Fett), Star Trek (Discovery and Picard), and so on. The insider claims Feige believes he can make it work because he believes in his own abilities, but how long he'll be allowed to flail unchecked is unclear.

Speaking of bad writing, Rings of Power is so bad the press, whose opinions are framed by their corporate masters, are now criticizing it en masse. They can't address everything that's wrong with the show, but feel safe identifying writing as the problem (an issue hardly unique to Rings, as Wheel of Time, Witcher, and most genre shows suffer from the same issue). I believe the writers are the target because that shifts blame away from those truly responsible for this fiasco: the executives in charge. The writers and showrunners (nobodies from Bad Robot), can easily be jettisoned. I think what we'll see in Rings season two is a soft fix ala The Witcher--it will look slightly better (Elves will look like Elves, the armour will improve, they'll hire a proper fight choreographer, etc), but the writing will remain atrociously because Jennifer Salke is a clueless ideologue and can't hire writers based on talent. Speaking of Salke, it's amusing to see the theories that the universally hated Rings version of Galadriel is a Salke self-insert (something I consider likely, but I doubt we'll ever be able to confirm it).

Sony has delayed the release of its two latest Marvel offerings (both of which had completed filming): Kraven and Madame Web. This suggests reshoots are needed, particularly for Kraven, and given how poorly Morbius was received and how underwhelming Venom 2 performed, it's no surprise. Can Sony make a good Marvel film? I highly doubt it, but now would be the time when the MCU is reeling from its terrible Phase Four.

Fan-baiting

While this concept isn't new, an excellent post discussing it came out recently that I wanted to address.

"Fan-baiting” is a form of marketing used by producers, film studios, and actors, with the intent of exciting artificial controversy, garnering publicity, and explaining away the negative reviews of a new and often highly anticipated production. Fan-baiting emerged as a marketing strategy in 2016/17, after fans of beloved franchises such as Ghostbusters and Star Wars objected to what they saw as poor writing choices, sloppy scripts, and cheap alterations to plot lines and characters for the sake of shock value. Along side these critics, there was a small group of bigoted but vociferous commentators who objected to the inclusion of black and female actors in roles traditionally held by white male actors. Some of these individuals began publicly harassing actors. Bigots have always attacked diversity on screen, but in a highly polarized political climate, instances of harassment on garnered disproportionately massive media coverage, which provided production studios with both free publicity and a new defence against actual critics. Studios seized the opportunity to discredit criticism of poor writing & acting, insinuating that these, too, were motivated by bigotry. What used to be accepted as standard critiques were increasingly dismissed as part of the ignorant commentary of a “toxic fandom.” Soon, it became standard practice before release to issue announcements specifying diverse casting choices, coupled with pre-emptive declarations of solidarity with the cast whom they now counted on to receive disparaging and harassing comments. Actors who are women and/or BIPOC became props & shields for craven corporate laziness and opportunism. The studios save money both by avoiding expensive veteran writers as well as by offloading publicity to news outlets and social media covering the artificial controversy. “Fan-baiting” works. It brings in a new sympathetic audience whose endorsement is more about taking a public stance against prejudice than any real interest in the art. “Fan-baiting” also permits studios to cultivate public skepticism over the legitimacy of poor reviews. “Fan-baiting” also compels reviewers to temper their criticism, for fear of becoming associated with the “toxic fandom” and losing their professional credibly, resulting in telling discrepancies between critic and audience review scores. The true nature of “fan-baiting” is never so clear as when a script is well-crafted and audience reviews are accordingly positive, exposing the announcements, declarations of solidarity, & grooming of skepticism for what they really are: cynical corporate marketing tactics. Put another way, media corporations have found a way to monetize the racism that they set their actors up to receive.

It has been pointed out this strategy actually goes back to 2015's Fan4stic, when Fox used it to try to save that film--an effort that failed monumentally. That failure ties into the something the poster does not discuss, which is that this approach almost always fails in terms of box office/viewership (while usually succeeding with official reviews). There are rare cases where a show uses this approach and succeeds (the first season of The Witcher or currently with House of the Dragon), but in both cases the marketing hurt rather than helped and the shows had to overcome the hostility they created to find that success (in The Witcher's case, very fleeting success).

The whole pantomime is getting tired and seems to go hand-in-hand with bad writing. The strategy has never worked on film and is disastrous for the highly profitable secondary market (toys etc, which the hypothetical new audience does not buy--Star Trek is a great example of how clearly this fails, as the toy manufacturers eventually refused to make the merchandise). Fiscally, fan-baiting makes no sense at all, yet it's unclear when (if?) that will dawn on executives and they were change strategies.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Fantasy and Science Fiction TV/Movie News

We have an update on the Red Sonja movie, which has been radio silent for months. M. J. Bassett has completed her script, hired actors, and begun filming. Who are the relevant parties? Let's look:

• Matilda Lutz (They Were Ten) is the new Red Sonja; she's not a redhead (sadly), and a bit off type (she's Italian versus the source's pseudo-Celt), but she's an improvement over Hannah John Kamen
• Wallis Day (Batwoman) is playing her wicked half-sister Annisia (a creation of Gail Simone, so visually represents things Gail hates: pretty, blonde, white)
• Robert Sheehan (Umbrella Academy) is Draygan; possibly a misspelling of Dragan, the Zamoran Emperor and Red Sonja's enemy in the recent (2019) Mark Russell arc, but the actor seems too young for that so either he's an original character or has been changed
• Manal El-Feitury (Hellboy) as Ayala; another Simone invention (2013), who in the source material is an attendant for Red Sonja (El-Feitury seems a bit old for that function, so I'd expect changes--perhaps just being her friend)
• The other announced characters all seem like inventions for the film
• Joey Soloman and Tasha Huo are still listed as writers, but we know both were fired and that Bassett herself (along with her daughter) wrote the film--I suspect there are technical reasons why their names are still attached, but that's my speculation

Deadline (link above) has no idea what the story is and the article seems like a mix of marketing and an effort to avoid industry backlash for the changes (I've seen none of the latter, so in that respect the effort worked).

What could the story be? It's not clear and I won't pretend to be steeped in the lore (I'm familiar with the Robert E. Howard source material and the 1985 film, but that's it). On the surface the casting suggests Barrett is pulling from the recent Dynamite comic runs, but she may have no choice in that matter, as Millennium is likely echoing the MCU approach of avoiding paying rights holders like Red Sonja creator Roy Thomas. Simone is a consultant on the show, but we don't know how much influence she has (authors often have less than imagined--George R. R. Martin was heavily involved with the first four seasons of Game of Thrones, but not the last four, yet his credits didn't really change throughout). The fear about Simone's involvement is her inflammatory public persona and divisive politics--something that would specifically turn off the core audience for the IP. Regardless, if we get an origin story, Simone's is likely since Thomas' involves rape.

Will we get a good show? Given how miserable modern entertainment is that's hard to imagine, but Bassett produced a faithful Soloman Kane film, so the possibility exists. As story details leak and the marketing begins, it will be much easier to judge.

In doing research for this it was interesting to discover that Dynamite Comics experimented with Third Wave writers like Simone and Marguerite Bennett for awhile before returning to financial success with less divisive folk at the helm (earning them multiple spinoffs and so forth).

It's not often a big budget tentpole IP faces real criticism from reviewers, but the atmosphere around Amazon's Rings of Power has been so bad even a few shills have broken ranks to criticize it. The fandom, as expected, loathes the production which echoes the Abrams/Bad Robot approach. The initial episodes mimic Fellowship of the Ring so strongly even critics noticeed, just like A Force Awakens mimicked the original Star Wars; we're also getting a dose of Alex Kurtzman madness from Picard with yet another group of strange warrior nuns (why we need them when the show is already stuffed with female leads I have no idea). The result is an expensive looking CW show that no one wants. I have no idea what Amazon will do with the disastrous reception (something they were warned about by Tom Shippey years ago)--do they go the CBS root with Star Trek and simply continue with no one watching, or is there enough financial pressure that people will be fired (the showrunners are easy targets, and perhaps Lindsey Weber could be seen out too, but the person ultimately responsible, Jennifer Salke, seems safe and thus nothing meaningful can change)? My guess is Amazon will do minor tweaks to the show ala Witcher season two (Elves will go back to looking like Elves, for instance), which wasn't nearly enough. What they should do is disavow the season and start over, but there's no chance that will happen.

In the midst of writing this those involved now claim the show is not for Tolkien fans--that's been clear for quite some time, but then what was the point of buying the rights if you weren't trying to profit of that audience? It's a desperate form of spin.

The shoe finally dropped and we now know the strategy WB is taking with The Flash: the path of least resistance, attempting to salvage the film by salvaging Ezra Miller. As long speculated, Miller has gone the route of apologizing and getting treatment. I suspect facing the prospect of no career as well as legal issues was enough to nudge the troubled actor into these actions and I think the odds of this effort working (in media terms) are quite good barring more incidents. Will fans accept Ezra? That remains to be seen.

She-Hulk is getting eviscerated by fans (it's the most pushback I've seen against an MCU show to date); quality aside, idiotic comments from those involved have hurt (Maslany complaining about how women are sexualized vs men in the MCU was so profoundly dumb she privated her Instagram in the aftermath). The show's horrific writing has lead to terrible numbers on D+ (the second worst opening for the MCU behind Ms. Marvel and declining from there). Fringe critic Chris Gore seems to be the only person actively defending the show.

A fan did some sleuthing and believes the rights to the Hulk and its associated characters will revert to Marvel in 2023 (allowing films to be made by Disney without Universal's involvement). This is based on a 15-year window for Universal to do something with the IP (the last Hulk film was in 2008). I would have been thrilled about this a few years ago, but given the current state of the MCU I'm not.

There was a lot of trumpeting The House of the Dragon's opening for HBO (much like Amazon did for The Wheel of Time's opener), but as has been pointed out, it opened 80% lower than any season eight episode of GOT and got killed in the key demographic (18-49). The marketing (which WB spent 100-million dollars on) from HBO suggests much higher numbers, but they have a long history of exaggerating their views (Watchmen claimed 7 million instead of the actual 1.5). It will be interesting to see how well it can hold its audience--what I've seen in the fandom is mixed response with the general sentiment being: "compared to the usual crap we get, it's not bad". For me the writing isn't good enough and the show fails to maintain verisimilitude. The success it has is largely riding on a mix of nostalgia and Matt Smith (and let me restate that Martin is not at his peak writing powers--he's been in decline since A Storm of Swords).

That aside, the show being renewed for a second season is not surprising. I have said many times that fantasy shows are so expensive to produce there has to be multiple seasons to help amortize the costs (ergo The Wheel of Time continuing when it completely bombed). To that end we can note that many high profile shows do get cancelled after one season despite being 'renewed' during their run as a marketing ploy (ala Watchmen and Lovecraft Country). One interesting change HBO has made during the season is booting executive producer and director Miguel Sapochnik--he and showrunner Ryan Condal have both said dumb things in interviews promoting the show, but Sapochnik has been worse, so replacing him with Alan Taylor is a positive move.

I have to wonder if the penny has dropped for George about the insanity he's been tacitly embracing the last few years. After Salman Rushdie was stabbed he had this to say:

And these days freedom of speech needs defenders, for when I look around, I find it under attack everywhere. Blacklisting, cancel culture, libraries being closed or defunded, classic works of literature being banned or bowdlerized or removed from classrooms, an ever growing list of “toxic” words the mere utterance of which is now forbidden no matter the context or intent, the erosion of civility in discourse. Both the Rabid Right and the Woke Left seem more intent on silencing those whose views they disagree with, rather than besting them in debate. And the consequences for those who dare to say things deemed offensive have been growing ever more dire; jobs lost, careers ended, books cancelled, “deplatforming.”

This is the first attack on the left I've seen George make, but clearly he's right in that extremism on both ends is hurting everyone. How much this will impact his writing is hard to say--probably not at all, but I give him credit to make the comment nonetheless.

I'm curious if Olivia Wilde's current self-inflicted problems (issues with Florence Pugh aside, lying about firing Shia LaBeouf is the case in point) will impact the Sony Marvel film she was hired to direct back in August, 2020 (speculated to be Spider-Woman). There's no sign of that film going into production (a common theme for Sony Marvel), but Wilde lighting herself on fire for no discernible reason does not speak well for her. Will it have an impact? I'm guessing not--in a world where Ezra Miller can skate free on what's happened, Wilde's actions pale in comparison.

In terms of numbers, as best we can tell via Google Trends (we simply don't have good streaming numbers, particularly outside the US), nothing compares with Stranger Things, but in a more apples-to-apples scenario, The Sandman peaked slightly higher than The Boys or Umbrella Academy, but fell off much more quickly than both. She-Hulk barely registers, while House of the Dragon has beat Rings of Power, but lags far behind its monster progenitor (eg, eg, eg, and eg).

This article was written by Peter Levi