Rings of Power Viewership Leaked, Honor of Thieves Disappointing Second Week, Shazam Flops, and More

In the midst of a long article from THR (about the disastrous state of Amazon under the guidance of Jennifer Salke), we got some real Rings of Power numbers leaked by inside sources: 45% of foreign viewers stuck with the series from start to finish, and just 37% in the US. That's abominable and while Amazon has no choice but to publicly support the expensive disaster, even less people will show up for season two and one wonders how long Jeff Bezos will underwrite this nonsense. RoP is not an isolated failure and the article goes through the laundry list of bombs that have plagued Amazon since Salke was put in charge over her MeToo'd predecessor. The positive is there's a good chance that by the time season two airs things will have changed and we won't have a third season inflicted upon us.

It appears as though fears that Honor Among Thieves would disappoint at the box office are true. After a middling opening, the film has been buried by The Super Mario Brothers (Honor's second weekend dropped 63%, from 40 to 14.5 million, even falling behind John Wick, which released a week earlier). I wonder if it can hit 200 million, but whatever the final number is this is a disaster for Paramount and Hasbro. As entertaining as Honor can be, as I said in my review, it's ultimately forgettable and whatever positive word of mouth there was did not generate much new or return traffic (I will be seeing it again with one of my gaming groups, however). What's interesting to me is the personalities in the D&D scene almost universally liked the film, which means their opinions aren't relevant to a general audience (a fascinating if not surprising revelation), and probably not even the general D&D audience. One thing I didn't go over in my review that I now think impacted the film is that aesthetically there's nothing distinctive about it--looking like every other fantasy release from the last few years--one of the things that saved Avatar 2 from its simplistic writing was its distinctive aesthetic (just like the original).

As expected, Shazam 2 has become the biggest DCEU bomb at the box office (it stands at 127 million). This doesn't inherently make it the worst DC film we've had in terms of quality, but it's not good and clearly the public is tired of terrible films from DC (so the framing brand no longer has any pull--the same thing happened at Fox with the X-Men). Will Blue Beetle bomb even harder? It's too early to say, but having the director already fighting with fans over his 'edgy' Batman-line won't help (yet another example of fan-baiting).

There was a time when I wished more shows and films followed the BBC example of hiring actors who looked like everyday people, but now that everything is cast like that, I've realized the problem in doing so. The approach only works in IP requiring that element (Bob from Bob's Burgers is an Everyman, so depicting him as something else wouldn't work). When I see actors who could be my neighbours in a context that make no sense it creates ludonarrative dissonance. One of the reasons traditional myths are stuffed full of extraordinary people is because they fantastic in the first place. The heroes are meant to inspire and entertain, so they become exaggerated--no one can actually be Superman or Beowulf--the point of the stories is to encourage what's seen as good societal behaviour, not to become the mythical person (and no well-adjusted person is literally trying to be what they see on screen). The argument against this tends to lean on representation for body positivity, but this lacks studies to back it up the cause and effect (surely if what's on screen impacts behaviour, America wouldn't be the most obese nation on earth--and if one wants to argue that's a negative result created by what's on screen, you then have to explain why the rest of the world, other than Canada/UK, don't have the same problems).

There are reasons to be concerned about programs like ChatGPT, but I derive some amusement that the first people impacted by this are likely the shills--suddenly thousands of reporters become redundant since computers can easily regurgitate corporate/government talking points. Pushing beyond the news, do you need a John Campea when a computer can do what he does for almost no cost? The problem shills have is they aren't distinctive, which makes them easily replaced by programming. Of course, the serious implications of AI go much further (Amazon--and Starbucks--are looking to replace the bulk of their employees with robots--Bezos currently has about 1.6 million employees, Starbucks 400k), and the implications of sex robots hit at the heart of human relationships, but if you can't laugh about serious things you'll go crazy.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Dragonlance Show, House of the Dragon Season Two, The Last of Us Finale, Witcher Sirius, and Honor Among Thieves Box Bombing?

I said a couple of weeks ago that what Dragonlance needs to revive the IP is a successful adaptation. Apparently an effort to adapt it is being pursued as a show (the news dropped in late February). No one has picked it up yet and we can't say what kind of show it would be. My initial guess is an abomination like Witcher, Wheel of Time, Willow, or Rings of Power, but we can't exclude the possibility it will be something good (or at least adequate). Joe Manganiello is heading the project at the behest of WotC. Does the entertainment I got out of Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves give me hope? No. The flaws in that film that I could overlook would ruin a television show. The writing would have to be much, much better, and the overall caliber of actors would have to improve. I also think an original story is the way to go, because adapting the classic trilogy is guaranteed to turn into the disasters I named above. If Honor loses money (which seems likely, see below), that makes pitching another D&D-based property that much harder, so we'll just have to keep our eyes open and see what happens.

It's interesting to hear that House of the Dragon is getting a reduced episode count for its second season (from 10 to 8) and that season three has not already been given the green light. One can try to find positives in fewer episodes, but the truth is it reflects the financial reality that the show wasn't a hit (it didn't flop, but it wasn't a smash either). HofD was not as loathsome as Rings of Power, but there was no explosion of merchandise or residual interest in Game of Thrones. Trying to succeed with a prequel to a show that failed was never going to be easy to begin with and it gets doubly hard when one of the stars of the first season (Paddy Constantine) isn't going to be in the next.

The Last of Us finale couldn't quite reach it's episode four peak with the finale (1,109 vs 1,011, about 9% lower). It's an increase over the episode six dip (15% over 943), but it couldn't recapture the buzz from the early season (matching in spirit it's Trends decline I went over previously). To provide some perspective, a forgettable teen drama (Outer Banks) crushed TLOU with its opener (2,214, more than double the peak) and plenty of other shows have peaked much, much higher. The hype around it reminds me of both Watchmen (2019) and Lovecraft Country (2020)--each the greatest show ever from HBO, which mysteriously never got second seasons (the latter was announced and then cancelled before going into production). We are getting a second season for TLOU and the showrunners have already announced it's going to be very different from The Last of Us Part II--a reminder of how badly that game flopped. I'm disappointed we won't see live action versions of all the sequel's stupidity--without towels, golf, and other silliness, there's nothing to interest me in what HBO has on offer.

I've had standalone articles on the Witcher 1 remake and Witcher 4 in progress for awhile, but on the snippet side of the news the Witcher project called Sirius has new information attached to it: the company announced it's changing it's original conception and essentially starting fresh. The rumour that's come with this news is that it's going to be a one-off Japanese-inspired take on The Witcher. Via the link above, Neon Knight goes over the rumour whose idea I don't find interesting (Geralt is already like a Samurai and CDPR just spent an entire game swimming in Japanese culture with Cyberpunk 2077). The other part of the rumour, that CDPR decided to scrap the MP part of the game, seems plasubile, but that's the most distinctive part of the project to begin with. I don't see how a move like this would help the game--turning Geralt into a Samurai is the least distinctive thing you could do with him.

For those who missed it, I posted my review of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves. To sum it up: it's a fun, dumb movie--better than I expected, but with plenty of room for improvement. In terms of the box office, the film is tracking for a better than expected opening weekend (bumping from 30-35 million to 35-40 domestically and hitting 37, 70 worldwide), but that still has it heading towards failure given its bloated 150 million budget. I suspect the fact that it looks like all the recent fantasy abominations (Rings of Power, Wheel of Time, Witcher, etc) has made casual fans skip it. That's the big problem the industry is facing, as the zeitgeist is flipping and the soft, largely imaginary market currently being pursued isn't big enough to support the industry.

Because I've been writing articles about a range of topics for a long time I get to see experts in one area express unrelated political opinions regularly. I don't mean generic expressions, but specific statements. What tends to come out of their mouths boggles the mind. There's an undercurrent of smug arrogance which neatly fits their economic bracket, and the content merely reflects headlines and whatever limited snippets of information they get spoon-fed by cable news.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves Review

[I've updated this after I saw it a second time April 23rd--new comments are noted via long italics]

I saw Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves with low expectations. As someone who saw the original D&D film in theaters ("Snails!"), this wasn't my first rodeo--I can still see Justin Whalin's ridiculous Jimmy Olsen haircut contrasting with literally everything else around him in that film. The 2000 movie is hilariously bad and I knew Honor would be at least competently made. So how was it? It's an entertaining film with plenty of flaws--ones that would normally ruin the experience for me-- but this is a rare case where the pacing and humour were enough to keep me going despite the problems. I'd compare it to Guardians of the Galaxy 2 if you cut most of the bloat. There's a strong Guardians templating in Honor and I'll mention it when it comes up. Let's dive into some specifics (possible spoilers ahead, but I'll do my best to be vague):

The Plot

An iteration of 'save the princess' and on paper this is fine--I approve of it not being a save-the-world scenario--personal stakes is a good choice. Unfortunately, I could not care less about the actual goal because Chloe Coleman (Kira) and the actress who plays Edgin's love interest (I can't remember the character's name) can't act. Coleman gets more screen time and it's painful watching her (the only emotion I felt was irritation). Normally when the goal of the story isn't engaging, a film becomes unwatchable, but I was able to get passed it here.

Performances

We'll go in order of best to worst:
Edgin (Chris Pine) - holds the film together and owns all the scenes he's in; while I didn't care about his wife or daughter, I did want to see Edgin succeed and whenever things shifted to, say, Holga, I wanted to get it over with and return to Edgin; I think the similarities to Peter Quill are minimal--in part because of the different ages--although there is an emotional similarity to Quill's mother's death and the death of Edgin's wife

Forge (Hugh Grant) - delightful and the film would have benefitted from more of him--his attachment to Kira makes little sense (a problem based on her bad acting and the writing), but I couldn't help but cheer for him throughout; he's definitely a riff on Yondu, but funnier with less depth

Doric (Sophia Lillis) - there's so much missed opportunity here, as Lillis is an excellent actress and she's given almost nothing to do; her backstory is as poorly executed as everyone else's, but fortunately the film spends almost no time on it; there's a muted Nebula-vibe to her (her anger and mistrust of humans while being seen as an 'other', but with the sister angle axed); until this film I had no idea how tiny Lillis is (she's 5'0)

Sofina (Daisy Head) - given almost nothing to work with, she exudes the emotions required from the role--more depth would have been nice, but that applies to all the characters; the similarities to Ronan are present (but with less depth--she has all the rage he does, but the motivation is paper thin, 'I'm eeeeeevil!')

Xenk (Rege-Jean Page) - a small role where, other than having the right attitude for a paladin, his combat/abilities don't separate him from any other fighter; were it not for interactions with Edgin, he wouldn't work (his battle against his long-time enemy has no emotional impact and is overly long); he's clearly a riff on Drax (but not nearly as effective)

Holga (Michelle Rodriguez) - she's adequate throughout, but Rodriguez has no acting range and its a strange choice to give her a number of emotional scenes (the one with her ex might be the worst in the film--the FX for halflings is quite bad)--fortunately, none of these moments last long; I believe this is meant to be a Gamora-riff (as she and Edgin have a platonic parental relationship), but Zoe Saldana is a much better actress than Rodriguez, so it doesn't work nearly as well; she also has too much time spent on her fight scenes--in a film like this there's just no reason to show her in multiple sequences (it's just bloat--we know from the initial scene how capable she is). I also could not care less if she lived or died in the film (just as I didn't care about Edgin getting his wife back), muting the emotional beat being sought at the end.

Simon (Justice Smith) - looks like he's twelve years old, which is unendingly distracting; he's adequate in what's meant to be a typical Michael Cera role (awkward); I didn't hate him, but it's easy to imagine another actor doing much more with it; there's no obvious Guardians-parallel that I can see (if anything it echoes Presto from the D&D cartoon); his 'romance' with Doric is paper thin and the two have no chemistry at all--Simon comes across as largely creepy

Character Arcs

Technically the main cast all has them (Edgin, Doric, Holga, and Simon), but none are engaging--I felt no investment whatsoever. The small nods to romance are poorly executed and there's no chemistry in any of them (none are even believable). What saves this from being a complete disaster is so little time is spent on them--they aren't given enough time to become annoying (and, at least with Simon, his journey is punctuated by humour). Of them all Holga's is the least effective, as her side trip to see her ex is overly long and pointless (yes they get the staff by doing so, but that could have been acquired in other ways)--it's simply a jarring pause that fails the emotional beat it's aiming for. Edgin's relationship with his daughter is almost as bad, in part due to the acting and because the daughter is essentially dead weight throughout (her heroic action at the end feels unearned and stapled on).

The Writing

The humour works (without it the film wouldn't), holds up on a second viewing, and the fast pacing holds it together; the pathos completely fails (some of that can be blamed on the acting, but it's largely a writing issue) and the stakes are irrelevant because I didn't care what happened to the characters or the world itself (I just wanted Edgin and Forge to succeed, because I liked both).

The Action

Adequate. The monster fights are fun, but the sword play is simply adequate and tends to drag (it's less about length than about the fights having no real emotional impact). No one is going to see this film again based purely on the action (Xenk and Holga's fight scenes are so similar that there's no distinguishing between the two--something that really hurts Xenk's potential distinctiveness). I'm not sure what was behind ignoring the magical abilities of paladins (Xenk) and bards (Edgin); clerics and healing magic are also largely ignored (presumably to help maintain dramatic tension).

World Building

No effort is made to world build (it's impossible to guess the cultural and social differences between anyone), but the Forgotten Realms is a farrago of nonsense anyway. The problem this creates is that it means what you are watching fails to be distinctive--it could slot into virtually any fantasy milieu, making it far less memorable.

FX

It's a mixed bag--none of it is excellent, but most of it isn't terrible. For me it was fine, especially for a film that leans so heavily into humour. The most jarring effects, oddly enough, were with the halflings.

80s Easter Egg

While I appreciated the nod to the 1980s cartoon, I have no idea why Eric was randomly race-swapped or why they didn't pick an actual redhead to play Shelia instead of a woman with dyed hair. It doesn't matter that much, but given how popular the IP is in Brazil, it's odd not to please that audience with what is only a memberberry. One thing it did do is reaffirm that I'm glad this was an original story rather than an adaptation.

Final thoughts

This is a fun, mindless action/comedy. As such, it fills a niche that's largely unexploited in fantasy (which tends to take itself seriously). The downside is that it also makes the film largely forgettable (no one is going to feel emotionally impacted by it). That lack of distinctiveness seems to be why the film flopped--having cost 150 million to make, it needed to crest 500 million to break even, but barely hit 200. At the end of the day, aiming for a casual audience they missed it entirely.

For those wondering/concerned about the ESG/BlackRock impact on the film: it's suffused with it (that's obvious from the casting), but tame compared to Rings of Power, She-Hulk, etc. It is a little distracting that every single relationship is interracial--you don't need a sledgehammer to pound a nail--but I don't think that impacted the reaction to the film (the irony of BlackRock is its efforts, when they have any impact at all, is the opposite that's intended). I am amused at how different the marketing is for the merchandise, as the focus is so strongly on Chris Pine you'd be forgiven if you didn't know it's an ensemble film.

I will be seeing the film again with one of my gaming group's and when I do I'll note any variation in how I feel after a second helping (now integrated above).

This article was written by Peter Levi

Star Wars, Jonathan Majors, The Last of Us, and Rick and Morty

In the wake of Victoria Alonso's firing (she is not taking it well), there was news from Disney that Damon Lindelof had been released from his Star Wars film (which was going to happen right after Watchman season two...). This cancellation has been expected for some time, but Lindelof kept talking about it as if it would happen (ala Rian Johnson) until recently (cf). This brings to mind Star Wars, which I don't discuss often as I'm not a superfan (I hated the prequels, sequels, and the shows). The bungling IP deserves at least a re-visit because of its impact on Disney (I've enjoyed the cycle of outrage YTers adopting someone--George Lucas, John Favreau, etc--and then rejecting them as their work inevitably falls off a cliff). Let's look at the cancellation slate (which is mostly echoed in the image above):

Michael Arndt's episode seven (2013) - no one knows why he left, but he was replaced by Abrams

Josh Trank's Boba Fett film (2015) - ditched in the wake of the Fan4stic disaster

Gareth Edwards' version of Rogue One (2016) - partially reshot and edited by Tony Gilroy

Colin Trevorrow's episode nine (2017) - he couldn't adjust to Johnson's radial departure from Abrams' storyline

Original version of Solo by Phil Lord and Chris Miller (2017) - film completely reshot by Ron Howard

James Mangold's Boba Fett film (2018) - eventually became the laughable D+ show from Favreau

Stephen Daldry's Kenobi trilogy (2018) - cancelled in the wake of Solo bombing, becoming the horrendous D+ show from Joby Harold

Benioff & Weiss prequel trilogy (2019) - cancelled in the wake of Game of Thrones season eight bombing

Rangers D+ show (2021) - cancelled because it was going to star fired actress Gina Carano

Petty Jenkins Rogue Squadron (2022) - fired as a result of Wonder Woman 1984 bombing (from this and her entire slate of projects)

J. D. Dillard project (2022) - an Abrams acolyte, no one knows what this was

Kevin Feige/Michael Waldron's Star Wars film (2023) - cancelled in the wake of Marvel's disastrous Phase Four

Rian Johnson trilogy (2023) - Johnson's theatrical film career has been essentially dead since his Star Wars effort

Damon Lindelof/Justin Britt-Gibson's film (2023) - Lindelof's nightmarish efforts over the last eight years caught up to him (2012's Prometheus should have ended his career long ago)

The public has missed nothing of value here, but the comical ineptitude at LucasFilm (currently undergoing an audit in light of the lawsuit against The Acolyte--see below) was not echoed by Marvel until we reached Phase Four. Star Wars is a listless, aimless mess with the IP in such a bad state it can't support films and it's D+ efforts went from mediocre to unwatchable. Inexplicably, Taika Waititi's project is still officially ongoing, despite the reaction to Thor 3--it's unclear if Waititi will sleep with one of his actresses for this project too (no MeToo worries for Taika--maybe Tessa Thompson's vacuous acting is related to no one caring).

According to Kamran Pasha, The Acolyte is not truly in production, with the filming that's ongoing being akin to a demo reel to try and get it funded by Iger, something that's very unlikely because of the lawsuit against it.

In an 'uh-oh' moment, the MCU's Kang, Jonathan Majors (Lovecraft Country fame), was arrested for assaulting a woman. We have no idea if it's true or not and we're beyond the public reaction of 'believe all women' (unless it's Justin Roiland--see below), but it puts Marvel in a difficult situation. Kang is the major villain going forward in the MCU (despite Ant-Man 3 bombing), so what do you do? Should the charges be true (or the accusations drag on), Marvel could re-cast and move on, but it would be quite a blow to the plans Feige had in place for his supposed Thanos-replacement. On the plus side, re-casting also means re-introducing him in a film that people might actually watch--that's the glass-half-full way of looking at it. More seriously, let's hope the woman is okay and that the charges aren't true.

It's time to update HBO's The Last of Us. We saw a hike in viewerhip for episode four (cf), but it's declined through episode six (15% down from earlier, still up 12% from its opener). In terms of trends, the finale (Nielsen hasn't reached the finale yet) only brought it up to 60% of the interest when the show debuted. I feel like that's a pretty good representation of the audience that stuck with it. Does it warrant its second season? I think so. Has it become a cultural phenomena like Stranger Things? Absolutely not. Will I watch it? When Pedro Pascal gets introduced to towels and a golf club, yes (which will amusingly mirror his Game of Thrones exit).

I haven't watched Rick & Morty in quite some time, but I did see that Justin Roiland was getting universally dogpiled after domestic abuse allegations came out. He's just been cleared and in response those denouncing him have decided that, well, we can't really know if that clears him, so best to assume he's an abuser anyway. The lessons of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard can be ignored because there are no cameras in a courtroom and that's just sad. I have learned my lesson: I don't know what happened and the charges weren't worthy of court, so as far as I'm concerned, all we have against Roiland is that some people thought he was odd on set (very much like Josh Trank, for those who remember those complaints)--odd behaviour doesn't equate to condemnation for me.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Victoria Alonso's firing and trends in the MCU, DC, and Sony Marvel

It's so rare to get good news these days that when it comes it's hard to believe at first. THR reports that one of Marvel's insufferable ideologues, Victoria Alonso, has been fired. For those who don't know, Alonso has been with Feige since 2006, so she's deeply imbedded within the org (this optically is bigger than Bob Chapek firing exec Peter Rice in June). While she's hardly alone in shouldering responsibility for the horrors of Marvel Phase Four and Five (Nate Moore and Feige himself are also to blame), she's certainly the most publicly irritating and apparently the key figure in believing that the mantel of a hero (as in, the outfit/name/power set) is all that matters, not the person (and thus, the endless gender/race swaps/replacements). This means we'll be getting the X-Men rather than "The Mutants" at some point, albeit almost certainly with the same hackneyed writing and inane casting that's deeply ingrained at Disney (ex-Rick and Morty writers have become the equivalent of Bad Robot alums). What I think this means is Bob Iger decided to rattle Kevin Feige and let him know things have to change in terms of success--he's no longer untouchable. The thing is, I don't think Feige or Iger actually understand the problem, so I can't see them solving it. Let's briefly look at the box office for Phase Four (in order):

2021

Black Widow - 379 (+125 D+)

Shang-Chi - 432

Eternals - 402

Spider-Man 3 - 1.912 (w/Sony)

2022

Doctor Strange 2 - 955

Black Panther 2 - 858

Thor 3 - 760

2023

Ant-Man 3 - 463

Every film underperformed except for the memberberry/nostalgia-rich Spider-Man 3, with four of them losing money. This isn't to mention the horror show on D+ culminating in the mindnumbingly awful She-Hulk. Merch sales are dead, butts in seats have tanked, and the brand has stopped being must-see for casuals. As a fan (go read my archive), I haven't felt compelled to see a Marvel film since Spider-Man 2 or a show since Loki. Emergency re-shoots were required for virtually all these films, but to no apparent benefit.

Along with Alonso's departure, delays are now hitting all D+ MCU shows. A few weeks ago we knew that most of the shows were delayed, but now it seems like all are being shuffled to some degree (cf). The problem facing Marvel, however, is that most of these projects are completed and no one wants them. Their potential value decreases every day as the entertainment industry is forced (financially) to find other approaches to sell to the consumer (as opposed to their reflexive fan-baiting). Putting Echo or Agatha Harkness out in a couple of years won't make them bomb any less (they will probably do even worse). Re-shooting these projects is prohibitively expensive and there's no inherent interest in them anyway, so what can they do? If Iger was bold he'd quietly shelve most of them and release Loki season two and Secret Invasion ASAP--get them out of the way so you can move on. I don't think Iger is either willing or able to do that, so he's going to add a few jokes (ala Ant-Man 3), watch them bomb, and then hope that in 2025 or 2026 they put out films/shows people actually enjoy. The sad thing is, the bar for success is not high. Wednesday is a mediocre show but a huge hit (I unfortunately had to sit through that entire show). Stranger Things is a tremendously uneven show, but dwarfs almost everything else (it remains 'must-see' TV for casuals). Jurassic Park 6 is a muddled mess, but made a ton of money. Making hits isn't that difficult, but requires semi-competent writing and that's where Marvel has been failing (there are casting issues as well, but things like Falcon and the Winter Soldier weren't held back because of casting). To quote MCU inanity, they "need to do better!"

You'd be forgiven if you were unaware that Shazam 2 had hit theaters. Making a sequel to a film almost no one watched in 2019 is an odd idea to begin with (see Sony below), but as the IP was tied to Black Adam that didn't matter until Discovery bought WB. It's arrived in theaters with less potency than Sony's flop Morbius (30 vs 39 opening weekend) and could be the worst DC box office yet (beating James Gunn's uberflop The Suicide Squad--talk about failing upwards!). This is a final gift from the prior regimes (et tu, Sarnoff?), kicked off by Johns/Berg and wrapped up by Sarnoff. Let's re-visit the box office results per regime (cf):

Snyderverse

Man of Steel (2013) - 668

Batman v Superman (2016) - 873

Suicide Squad (2016) - 746

Snyder Cut (2021) - HBO Max

Cyborg (cancelled)

Harley Quinn vs the Joker (cancelled)

The Batman (cancelled)

Hybrid (Snyder/Johns+Berg )

Wonder Woman (2017) - 822

Justice League (2017) - 657

Johns/Berg (May/16)

Aquaman (2018) - 1.148

Shazam! (2019) - 366

Joker (cancelled)

Deathstroke (cancelled)

Hamada (Jan/18; Johns was there until June, but had been moved out of film)

Joker (2019) - 1.074

Birds of Prey (2020) - 205

New Gods (cancelled)

Black Manta film (cancelled)

Sarnoff (June/19; Hamada still there, but with limited creative control)

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) - 169

The Suicide Squad (2021) - 168

The Batman (2022) - 770

Black Adam (2022) - 392

Shazam 2 (2022) - 64 (thus far)

Blue Beetle (2023)

Batgirl (cancelled)

The Wonder Twins (cancelled) 

Supergirl (believed to be cancelled, eg)

Hybrid (Sarnoff/Zaslav)

The Flash (2023)

Aquaman 2 (2023)

Zaslav

Joker 2 (2024) - currently filming

The Batman 2 (2025) - production to begin in November

DC hasn't had a hit since 2019's Joker (which arrived at the height of comic film mania), with every release since losing money other than The Batman (which underperformed). In the race to the bottom, the MCU is competing with the worst of DC's efforts and thus far Zaslav's efforts of righting the ship by bringing in James Gunn has failed to do anything other than agitate the fanbase (cf).

Since we're looking at comicbook films, let's wrap-up by visiting the little brother among the big three IP holders and remind ourselves that yes, Sony is still making Marvel movies. By releasing at a slower pace, it's theoretically easier for Sony to adjust to changing approaches, but whether that's actually happening creatively is debatable.

Venom (2018) - 856

Into the Spiderverse (2018) - 375 (animated)

Venom 2 (2021) - 506

Morbius (2022) - 167

Kraven (2023) - post-production

El Muerto (2024) - pre-production

Madame Web (2024) - post-production

Across the Spiderverse (2024) - release shifted twice already (animated)

Venom 3 (TBD) - pre-preduction

Silk (announced in 2018 as a film) - became an Amazon show in 2021, changing showrunners in 2022 (TBD)

Uncertain/Shelved Projects

Sinister Six (in theory since 2013)

Silver & Black (various iterations since 2017)

Mysterio (floated in 2017)

Nightwatch (floated in 2018)

Jackpot (floated in 2018)

Olivia Wilde project (believed to be Spider-Woman, announced in 2020)

Robert Orci project (scooped to be happening via The Wrap, nothing has been heard since)

Sony has released four films with only the original Venom being a hit (and an ephemeral one, as it was unable to support its own sequel). Into the Spiderverse had Shazam box office numbers, but you'd never know that from the way the media sqees about it (and a sequel six years after the original is beyond odd--it's not Avatar after all). Sony's approach has been scattershot and I'd take projects in pre-production with giant grains of salt (El Muerto and Venom 3). Amy Pascal inexplicably has influence over these projects, despite being fired from Sony (clearly she has some control over the rights), meaning stupidity is injected into everything Sony does, even though her pet projects (such as Silver & Black) generally don't see the light of day.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Superman, Ant-Man 3, Blade, Willow, and Dragonlance

What do you do when the products you are making aren't popular, but you won't (or can't) change how you make them? Market them differently! This is the approach embraced by James Gunn for his upcoming (2025) Superman film. Do I believe him that it will be a four-quadrant film that will appeal to everyone? Absolutely not. Why don't I believe him? Because the venture capital that pays for his films (BlackRock etc) want entertainment to be like Phase Four. Gunn also continues to be haunted by his Henry Cavill decision, as I think it plays a part in why Ben Affleck recently said he will not direct for Gunn--that he doesn't like the direction he wants to take DC. Whatever one thinks of Affleck, that rejection is not a good look. This awkward bit of marketing is a tepid effort to paint roses on a chamber pot, but we know Gunn doesn't know how to make it work (as evidenced by The Suicide Squad bombing). I can only imagine how eagerly Zaslav wants to dump this problem on another company.

I knew Ant-Man 3 was a bomb, but in my wildest dreams never imagined it wouldn't even make the original Ant-Man's box office. Nearing the end of its theatrical run it's only made 453 million, a piddly amount that barely beats Shang-Chi. What a waste of Michelle Pfeiffer and Michael Douglas (even of Paul Rudd). I have no idea why they wanted Evangeline Lilly to look like a recovering cancer patient, but it doesn't help. I don't think this film is any worse than any other Phase Four effort, but Feige doesn't 'get it' so we're going to get more of this throughout Phase Five (with a high five to Bob Iger's emergency reshoots--I guess those extra jokes didn't help!).

Speaking of the MCU, back in October I guessed that the delays for Blade were due to the star being unhappy with the script. This has now been echoed by Jeff Sneider and this can only help the film improve, although I have no idea how good Ali is at gauging scripts. The fact that Marvel's original ideas were terrible are clear from every Phase Four and Five film thus far (one can argue about Spider-Man 3, but that's co-produced with Sony so a different animal). I doubt Brie Larson's meddling with The Marvels guarantees a similar positive effect (given what Captain Marvel was like).

As expected, Willow season two is not happening. The show isn't radically worse than anything else that's appeared on D+, but with Bob Iger in the midst of pulling back the amount of productions Disney is making, losing money on another season of Willow is not in the cards. This is not a sign that the company is re-evaluating its creative process, as future shows will still be terrible, it's just that there will be less of them. As for the IP itself, I think it's dead for now. A remake of the original in 5-10 years is possible, but as a cult film it's an iffy proposition.

Speaking of things that went up like a flaming fart, what about the attempted re-birth of Dragonlance? As I went over back in August, the IP had fizzled out long ago (after the animated film bombed in 2008, the writing duo hadn't released a novel since 2011). After settling a lawsuit with WotC regarding the rights (out of court, so we don't know the specifics), they put out a new novel in August (Dragons of Deceit), which is now papering landfills across the continent. WotC's 5e book arrived in December to little fanfare (none of the people I play with know what Dragonlance is or care about the setting). The bump it got from 5e was larger than from the book (which is no surprise--Weis & Hickman haven't had a hit book in decades), but still anemic. The only way forward for this IP, I think, is a largely faithful adaptation of the original book on screen, but that's impossible in our era (the creators themselves would oppose it).

This article was written by Peter Levi

Guardians 3, Punisher, The Last of Us, and the Changing Zeitgeist

The pop culture disaster that is James Gunn continues, but this time it's not DC-related. At Marvel he's fighting with fans over race-swapping (a decision I doubt he had much control over given Disney's quota system for casting, not that I think he opposes it). It's fascinating to me that fandom seems unwilling or unable to recognize that Gunn is stamped from the same mold as everyone else at Disney (or DC). He's more than willing to participate in the fan baiting approach that's become ubiquitous. It's just empty virtue signaling, and I say 'empty' because Gunn has nothing negative to say that impacts his bottom line or personal life--there's no objection to things like the lithium mining required to power his smart phone, or the manufacturing practices that dress him, or stepping down so a POC or alphabet community member can have his position, etc--it's all style, no substance (maybe not as bad as Jon Stewart giving a Neo-Nazi a medal, but still). Making the High Evolutionary black (and because this is America, the change is usually to black--just like Seth Rogen's new TMNT cartoon or Disney's new Little Mermaid) isn't going to accomplish anything. You'd think after years of failure the industry would give up on antagonistic tokenism (echoing what made Spike Lee complain back in 2001), but if the goal is ideological I suppose it's less about the money than it is about the statement.

It's no surprise to hear that Marvel finally signed Jon Bernthal to reprise his role as the Punisher, as they've been attempting to do so for years and it matches the same logic that brought Daredevil back. It's also no surprise that the prior Karen (the delightful Deborah Ann Woll) and Foggy (Elden Henson) won't return--the latter is a redhead (so an anathema in the industry) and both are white, so race-swapping is in order (the odds would make Foggy black; perhaps Karen will be Asian, to borrow Netflix's failed Elektra idea, cf; it's unlikely either would be Latino, as Marvel considers Latinos white). We have to assume the show will feature the same awful writing that has become the norm for the MCU, because there's been no change in their writing hiring preferences (they are doubling down on David Callaham of all things). In general though, I'm less troubled about the Punisher than other things. To my mind, the Punisher's second season (2019) had already started to ruin the character, while Daredevil had all sorts of problems at Netflix from both the second and third season (none are as bad as the D+ shows (Jessica Jones' final two seasons are), but they aren't good either). Do I think Bernthal's presence will help early ratings? Yes, but it won't sustain itself (Daredevil couldn't save She-Hulk either). The character will be subverted and humiliated just like Matt Murdoch.

A bit of humble pie for me as The Last of Us' ratings went up for episode 4 (via Nielsen). Despite that, it's Trends continue to fall, so it's an increase in eyeballs (over 30%), but less public discussion. This makes me think the casuals have already decided whether it's for them or not. Where the show seems to have landed is as a modest success, but not a smash hit (which does rationalize a second season). I can only hope we get the golf clubbing crescendo from The Last of Us Part II (y'all got a towel or anything?). For those looking for optimism, there's a gleam of hope for Naughty Dog themselves, that Druckmann will be too preoccupied with HBO to infect their games with his ideas (I think that's unlikely, but it remains as the only potential positive). On an anecdotal level I don't know anyone who has seen the show (which is unusual, as I know fans of Rings of Power and The Wheel of Time), but I expect that will change at some point.

It's been fascinating watching the entertainment industry try to deal with the unprofitability of their products. There's no acknowledgement of the cause (it can't be because of their own hackneyed ideas). Kevin Feige and Bob Iger think they just need to add a few more jokes (an idea that already failed in Ant-Man 3). I think Feige is trying to double down on memberberries, but that cupboard is not particularly full and its impact not assured (it worked in Spider-Man 3, but not in Doctor Strange). Not surprisingly, the consequences for failure vary widely. Let's look at some examples:

• Rian Johnson (The Last Jedi) - best known for fighting with fans (something he hasn't given up on); his Star Wars trilogy will never happen and his film career seems essentially dead after Knives Out (2019)
• Kevin Feige - lost his Star Wars film (which is shocking), but remains in absolute control of the MCU
• Taika Waititi - won't get another Thor-film, but his Star Wars project remains alive (link above)
• Brie Larson (Captain Marvel) - got demoted in her own sequel (Captain Marvel 2 is now The Marvels) and has been pulled as the face of the MCU's future, but remains in Marvel
• Melissa Rosenberg - on the rise after the first season of Jessica Jones (2015), landing a deal with WB that was quietly abandoned as a result of the next two seasons and she essentially hasn't worked since
• Patty Jenkins - given all the credit for Wonder Woman when (like James Gunn) she was brought in to finish someone else's project; had a slew of films lined up until the sequel bombed, all of which have been canned (link above as well as this for DC)
• Ava DuVernay (New Gods) - given the project in the Berg/Johns era, which she was quietly jettisoned from
• Jessica Gao (She-Hulk) - hit Neil Breen levels of stupidity with her show and was unable to keep her mouth shut; it appears as though she will be ushered out of Marvel
• Leslye Headland - despite the widespread belief she helped facilitate Harvey Weinstein's assaults when working as his personal assistant, her Star Wars project (Acolyte) is still ongoing (you have to wonder what she knows that gives her this kind of immunity/opportunity)
• Neil Druckmann - has been fighting with fans since he became an Anita Sarkeesian acolyte back in 2014; this antagonism has had no consequences, even though The Last of Us Part II bombed and The Last of Us Remastered is seen as a poorly executed cash grab
• Mindy Kaling - fought with fans over Velma, which bombed horrendously, but theoretically is getting a second season (I think it will air just after Watchman and Lovecraft Country season two...)
• Rings of Power duo - despite the show's horrendous reception, Amazon has not meaningfully changed it (although Ismael Cruz Cordova and Nazanin Boniadi won't be back)
• Lauren Hissrich - her limp efforts lost her Henry Cavill, which likely means losing the IP entirely (I think Blood Origins would have flopped regardless); for the moment the second announced animated spinoff is still occurring
• Ezra Miller - despite multiple instances of criminal activity (cf), is still the star in The Flash and getting heaps of praise from James Gunn
• David Lindelof - couldn't get a second season of Watchman (2019), has seen his film career die, but may get to write a Star Wars project (link above)
• Alex Kurtzman - the scab has been universally derided for his terrible work and forced creatively away from a lot of it, but continues to be attached to Star Trek (RIP Discovery)
• Neil Gaiman - in his later years fully embraced fan baiting that's made success harder--American Gods has dragged along without any resonance (look at the declining viewership), and had to publicly beg to get another season for his magnum opus, Sandman

Individual consequences aside, the biggest problem for the corporate overlords is that these efforts are failing with Gen-Z. Young people aren't attracted to the 'made for a modern audience' productions. Anecdotally young people consume a ton of older shows/films while reading Manga and teen fiction (there's a very obvious throughline with that material if you care to look for it). They will often espouse opinions that echo Feige, Gunn, etc, do incessantly, but they don't show up for things made with that in mind. I'd argue ideologues don't make quality entertainment, so having that as your priority when hiring guarantees failure. Pure spectacle can still work (Avatar 2), but it's expensive and risky (the MCU has tried it in multiple Phase Four/Five projects and they've failed to resonate).

This article was written by Peter Levi

Genre News: MCU, DCEU, Hogwarts Legacy, and The Last of Us

After so much bad entertainment (in the last three years I've seen one show I've liked), it's easy to be cynical and think that there are no consequences for failure--that there's so much money behind this nonsense that financial success has become irrelevant (after all, on an individual level, executives make money either way). However, we've started to see signs that company profits do motivate our corporate overlords. One of the latest signals of this is the MCU slowing down its Phase Five schedule. Let us recall that Phase Five started abruptly due to Phase Four failures. What's happening?

Delays, first reported by THR, are hitting heavily. Of the shows, only Secret Invasion and Loki season two will appear in 2023, with the already completed Ironheart, Echo, and currently filming Agatha Harkness moved to the following year (three shows no one asked for or wants). Don't get too excited, as Feige doesn't have any David Zaslav in him, so these abysmal products are still going to appear. Slow-dripping garbage isn't going to make it taste any better, but it does give Disney+ space to try and produce something that's actually crowd-pleasing.

Speaking of crowd-pleasing, Ant-Man 3 has arrived with the same anemic power of its Phase Four brethren, earning a paltry 367 million thus far and will settle in the doldrums of Shang-Chi/Eternals box office territory. This means casual film fans have given it a pass and even fewer people than expected will have any idea who Kang (the next Thanos in the MCU) is. The only response Feige and Bob Iger have had to failures like this is suggesting they need more jokes, but that's not going to cut it (as the emergency reshoots of Ant-Man 3 demonstrate). While one can argue the good stories in the MCU are relatively simple, that's fine for a comic book film--Iron Man isn't trying to be Citizen Kane. It's clear that the major issue at Marvel is that the creative people involved aren't that talented (there's hilarity in shills like John Campea saying the problem is that Feige needs more control--he's been in complete control throughout Phase Four and beyond!).

Back to the MCU's response to the problem: joining the TV delays is The Marvels (aka Captain Marvel 2) getting moved again. It had been pushed back from February to July, but now has been moved to November. The change provides plenty of time for reshoots (more jokes!), but given Phase Four's inability to fix anything with reshoots, it's not going to improve a film no one wanted in the first place.

The MCU is like the Titanic, except that everyone other than its leaders is aware of the iceberg. This kind of blindness killed the Star Wars IP, but it seems like Iger and Disney are unwilling or unable to identify the problem (the bar for 'good' could not be lower right now--Avatar 2 and Top Gun: Maverick are average films).

I feel fortunate that we got three good Phases out of Marvel--that's a string of quality content unlikely to be replicated--but what an awful fall from grace. It reminds me of the horror of the Star Wars prequels, which turned the IP into Jar Jar's memes and ramblings about sand (never forget). I have no idea why YT outragers heap praise on George Lucas, who saddled us with Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull (equally as stupid)--while the sequels are bad, that doesn't magically make the prequels good.

I wonder if Zaslav is already having buyer's remorse about hiring James Gunn, as every time he opens his mouth the DCEU's future looks bleaker. For a guy who supposedly has his finger on the pulse of his audience, he's clueless about what works for DC fans (it's difficult to imagine a worse handling of the Henry Cavill situation). Despite an outpouring of positivity when his involvement was announced (misplaced, in my opinion, but it was there), there's been nothing positive since. Shazam 2 is tracking to bomb even harder than Ant-Man 3, and the other moribund DC properties on the slate are also expected to struggle (as WB goes all-in on Ezra Miller and The Flash--you'd think this would pose problems for the very progressive Gunn, who ought to be outraged by the accusations against Miller, but I guess a fat paycheque overcomes moral objections). That's a terrible lead-in for whatever Gunn is planning and nothing he's announced sounds exciting. I feel think the future slate will change quite a bit (which is nothing new for DC on film).

Let's open this by making it clear that I'm not really a Harry Potter fan--I don't hate it, but it's impact on me is limited. I read the books and watched the films (RIP Richard Harris and Alan Rickman), which were entertaining enough, but one-and-done was enough for me. As for J. K. Rowling, I always found her faintly ridiculous (making comments about Hermione being black with the reflexive, backwards looking virtue signaling people in her class are notorious for). What Rowling has discovered is that no matter how hard you try to keep up with Neo-Liberal attitudes, you cannot cross the Dave Chappelle line. The backlash she's received is loud but ineffectual (no impact financially or on her career and, unlike Chappelle, no one has tried to physically attack her), but what Hogwarts Legacy has shown is we've reached the point where the public no longer cares about the outrage. I don't know where the tipping point was--Chapelle's The Closer (2021) is an indicator, as are things like George R. R. Martin (another virtue signaler), criticizing the movement and bemoaning not being able to call himself a feminist anymore. At some point the cancel crowd lost its fangs. This goes well beyond Rowling's specific controversy, as high profile cases involving Johnny Depp and Marilyn Manson have also gone against the 'believe all' rhetoric of 2018. I think things like the Amber Heard or Kyle Rittenhouse trial played a role in the public's changing attitude (where accusations had to meet a burden of proof and viewers could make their own judgements).

The fact that Hogwarts Legacy has made a fortune doesn't inherently make it a great game. What it does show is that journalists and the elite screaming at people has no impact on public interest. This has been evident in film and TV for years (Ghostbusters, anyone?), but the failed attempt with Hogwarts is so large it can't easily be ignored or forgotten. The movement, if you want to call it that, seems to have forgotten that progress is made by forging alliances (unions aren't formed by a hivemind, after all), not screaming at anyone who isn't already inside the club. While I'm glad to see the insanity starting to simmer down, I wish this kind of energy was being channeled into practical things like helping folks who are living under bridges. On a larger scale, the zeitgeist is changing, but into what remains to be seen.

The hype for HBO's The Last of Us was so loud I was expecting at least Rings of Powers-type Nielsen numbers, but now that they are out, it turns out the hype is bigger than the viewership (a banger show is well over 1,000 in the watched category above). This reality matches the Google Trend data I looked at previously (which was good, but not great)--for some perspective, TLOU's peak was 61% lower than the most recent season of Stranger Things, and 46% lower than Wednesday.  The show's trends are trailing off, with episode five hitting at less than 50% of episode one. It's easy to forget that modern shows rarely impact audiences like they used too--Wednesday lost to reruns of Seinfeld, after all. None of this means we won't get a second season and I'm sure this one will win awards--it would even if no one was watching--but it provides perspective on the hype. The IP is so degraded it's hard to feel the same affection for the original game that I've long had. The trends are awful--a disappointing DLC followed by an awful sequel, a poorly handled remake, and now an adaptation 'made for a modern audience'. Unlike The Witcher, where Netflix's hamfisted treatment leaves room for someone to do better, we won't get another adaptation for The Last of Us.

This article was written by Peter Levi