Gatsby77

I don't disagree, but also don't think it matters here. Because it's a Blumhouse production. Jason Blum's whole business model is low-budget horror (typically $5-$10 million total), bolstered by another $5-$10 million in marketing. They're designed so the film breaks even at ~$25-$30 million domestic. So all-in costs for Spawn are likely below $30 million. Example: Happy Death Day - $3.8 million Get Out - $4.5 million Split - $9 million Halloween - $10 million Most expensive Blumhouse film I can think of so far is Glass, at a whopping $20 million.

I'm with you on this, Sharon. And (you might be pleased to know) I still re-read the Wonder Woman story in that coverless/repro copy of Sensation # 1 you sold me every year. That said, my view of A vs. B vs. C-tier comic characters was colored mostly by my experience collecting comics as a kid in the late 80s/early 90s. A-list at that time: Batman, Wolverine, Spider-Man, Punisher, Ghost Rider (the _most popular_ characters) B-list: Superman, Captain America, Wonder Woman, Daredevil, Hulk, Iron Man, the other X-Men, Green Lantern, Flash, G.I. Joe, Spawn, Thor (mainstream, well-known characters that most in the general public would have heard of) C-list: Doctor Strange, Silver Surfer, Teen Titans, She-Hulk (solid characters that may have had trouble supporting their own title consistently since the 1960s -- always around, but not *necessarily* in their own book) D-list: Ant-Man, Hawkman, Jonah Hex, Sub-Mariner, The Atom, Legion of Superheroes, Power Pack, Doom Patrol, Moon Knight (could rarely support their own book, even if they once did) What's remarkable is how the movies have changed this perception. Today, Iron Man is arguably as famous as Spider-Man among non-comic collectors --because he's been in far more popular movies over the last decade. Likewise, Batman still trumps Wonder Woman in overall awareness and popularity due to his multiple film appearances since 2000 -- more than double that of Wonder Woman's. Then there's Black Panther -- who vaulted onto the A-list among among the general public based on a single strong film, and caught a lot of 40-something comic nerds by surprise in doing so.

Brie Larson's infamous role as "The Au Pair" on The League:

I disagree -- just like the movies are a different medium than the comics, so too do they differ from novels and short stories. Even with a master like Steven King, some major changes can work -- and some of his film adaptations are stronger than the original stories. Examples that come to mind? The Mist, with its last two minutes And The Shawshank Redemption, with Red being played by a black man.

Aquaman's day-to-day domestic take has now so far passed that of Suicide Squad that Box Office Mojo is now using BvS as a comp. As of 48 hours ago, Aquaman was running just 0.08% behind BvS. That's remarkable, given that BvS made nearly $100 million more than Aquaman on its opening weekend.

Has passed $1.1 bn. worldwide. And, now that it's within easy striking distance of $325 million domestic, it's firmly entrenched at # 5 for the year for domestic box office. Nice. Maybe it's *finally* profitable.

I agree. He falls into my category of "interesting" that folks like Armie Hammer do not.

Sure. Because each of those actors is inherently interesting in a way that say...Alden Eherenreich / Jai Courtney / Sam Worthington / Ansel Elgort are not. Wasn't thinking in those terms, but I feel like that's not so different than say... Hannibal King as Green Lantern as Deadpool. or The Human Torch as Captain America. or Jonah Hex as Thanos as Cable or Batman as The Vulture or Daredevil as Batman or Bane as Venom

I don't want to see Armie Hammer as Batman. I know he was already cast back in George Miller's 2009 Justice League project, but I think he's too milquetoast - only interesting work I've seen him do was his original break-out in The Social Network. Feel like it would be a George Clooney redux. I'd like to see someone with more edge -- or even quirky features instead. Michael Keaton worked because he was an atypical choice with slightly odd facial features. Christian Bale worked largely because of the baggage audiences brought with him from his role in American Psycho -- although no one knew it at the time, I think it ultimately served as his audition for Batman because Bruce Wayne = just a slight twist on Patrick Bateman. Examples of more interesting choices? Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy, or The Rock.

However, point of order - there's only one Spin Doctor in this thread.

Aquaman will pass Deadpool 2’s domestic total tomorrow. Weird - I thought Deadpool was more popular than Aquaman.

I'd be curious about any sourcing for this as well. Wikipedia lists five credited production companies, and all are U.S.-based. Notably, one is Zack Snyder's and one is Geoff Johns -- although those may have been small contributors -- LLCs used for tax-deffered payments in exchange for "Executive Producer" credits. I'd believe it, however, as - for instance - The Martian -- both the book and (to a lesser extent) the movie had blatant Chinese characters and plot points that seemed designed *only* to appeal to that market.

So...The Batman has a release date in 28 months, but still no confirmed cast? Great...

This. Exactly this. See also the current film "Serenity." You know - the one starring Academy Award winners Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway alongside Academy Award nominees Diane Lane and Djimon Hounsou? It's still hot garbage. The difference between Ghost Rider (starring Academy Award winner Nicolas Cage alongside Academy Award nominees Sam Elliott and Peter Fonda) and Venom? Both were hot garbage, but at least Ghost Rider has comedic re-watch value.

Umm...have you seen this yet? You know Peter Parker's in it, right?

At this point I'd wager we'll see Vin Diesel starring in Bloodshot 2: Electric Bugaloo before we see a solo Flash movie.

You're right. These were all incredibly successful. When's Justice League 2 coming out, again? When's Man of Steel 2 coming out? And who's playing Supes? When's The Batman coming out? And who's playing Batman? When's Green Lantern Corps coming out? And who's starring? When's Flash (or Flashpoint) coming out?

Umm...what? A cursory glance at Snyder's box office grosses shows the vast majority of people *specifically don't* like his style. It's why Watchmen and Sucker Punch were huge box office failures -- the films played to the comic book fanboys, at the expense of the general audience. (I re-watched Watchmen recently and think it's a great adaptation, but the price of making it so was to alienate the general audiences. He seriously made it just for the comic fans -- and it paid the price in box office receipts.) While I think Man of Steel was a superior superhero (and -- maybe) Superman film, I credit it more to Nolan's oversight -- particularly evident in the editing -- than Snyder per se. And that film was still deemed such a *failure* by WB that they scrapped a direct sequel and went with BvS instead. And, for the record, RT audience scores mean nothing -- and are easily manipulated. What does matter? Box office. Snyder's vision for the DCEU was flawed from the start -- and, while it took a few films before for the suits at Warner Brothers to catch on, they eventually did, and fired him.

This puts it less than $2 million away from passing Man of Steel domestically (in real, inflation-adjusted terms). Can you imagine someone back in 2015 saying, "umm...actually more people will go see Aquaman?"

Reminder that Ali has some geek cred that predates Iron Fist -- he was the African mercenary in Predators way back in 2010.

Yeah - but it's exactly that Ranked Choice scenario that has benefited Green Book and Roma in the run-up award shows, whereas the prior presumed favorite -- A Star Is Born -- has come up empty nearly across the board. At this point, I think actual Best Picture will go to either Green Book or Roma -- with A Star Is Born being a distant (yet possible) third. I think Bohemian Rhapsody will fall after the post-Golden Globes backlash (and its far different voting pool then the Academy) and The Favorite will act as the primary spoiler / dark horse -- a distant fourth choice that won't ultimately win Best Picture. Honestly, I'd love to see either Roma or A Star Is Born win -- but Green Book may sneak in there. TLDR: Zero chance Black Panther wins, and deservedly so. It's easily among the top 10 most important films of the year, but not in the top 5 for "Best."

I was about to fight you on this because I think The Dark Knight was a phenomenal film, and the apex of superhero movies so far. If any comic book movie was deserving of Best Picture, this was it. The problem is, it needs to be considered in context, vs. the other films of that particular year. Here's the thing -- It deserved to be nominated for Best Picture. And, sadly, it probably *should have* won. Here was the competition: Frost/Nixon -- Good, but not really re-watchable. More notable today as George Clooney's directorial debut. The Reader -- Ditto. Good, but not great. And too self-consciously Oscar bait. Milk -- Close, but not really Best Picture-worthy. Equivalent to this year's BlacKKKlansman. And better known today for the strong ensemble acting than anything else. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button -- Weak sauce. This is the film The Dark Knight should have displaced for a nomination. Slumdog Millionaire -- Won Best Picture. Totally original (as a movie - it was adapted from a novel), refreshing, and ground-breaking at the time. Especially notable for the story structure and editing. But...hasn't aged well. It belongs in that category of "loved at the time but not really great" -- see also "Shakespeare In Love" but it's certainly above the travesty that was "Crash"'s win in 2005 or "The Artist"'s win in 2011. As I said, I started to respond to disagree with you, but -- having examined the other films -- I agree. The Dark Knight should not only have been nominated for Best Picture, it should have won.

Yeah - I vote Geiger/McLeod. it’s a great cover, but I think it would be officially documented if Mcfarlane touched it. Also - nothing in that Hulk is orthogonal to me to Geiger’s other renditions of Hulk in the covers of 331-339.

I saw this recently via a $2.00 Redbox rental. And I'm conflicted, because it was fun, but it was also thoroughly mediocre. So the question is...am I (and Star Wars fans generally) okay with fun but mediocre/unnecessary (but still official) Star Wars films? All the other films -- including Rogue One -- were epic events where as this one seemed inconsequential and borderline forgettable. The question is whether a series of films like this are okay? I think I'm okay with this. It's brand dilution, but at the end of the day I'd prefer the option of more Star Wars films to less, even if there are some minor / bad entries. The flip side is Disney needs to be okay with this as well -- spending $200-$400 million on films that might only gross $500-$700 million worldwide, rather than expecting that *every* film has to gross $900 million + just because you slap the "Star Wars" brand on it. I honestly think that it'd be better for the franchise to embrace that not every Star Wars film needs to be an amazing *event,* -- something that Marvel has proven they understand. Yes - we get epics like Infinity War; but we also get throwaways like Ant-Man and the Iron Fist TV show.

Scott Mendelson's latest: Having now grossed $1.067 billion, "Jason Momoa and Amber Heard's Aquaman has now earned more worldwide than every Johnny Depp movie in unadjusted global box office." As in, it's now grossed more (albeit sans inflation) than both Rogue One and every Pirates of the Caribbean movie.