₦airaland Forum

abduleez1:
You asked for it. Here or is!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1htNUE32wE

What a trailer

What was Batman and Catwoman doing?

I don't know but I forsee Harley Quinn and Poison Ivy breaking up. Some relationships are better left as friendship I guess.


#Xavier
#DCian

abduleez1:
Seems Superman is IN Black Adam. Leaks from test screening says Amanda Waller tells Supes she has someone that can take him on.

Waller meets Superman telling him she now has someone who can beat him. Seemingly setting up a Black Adam vs Superman story of sorts.

If this is true, it will just be a cameo at the end of the film and a very high probability that they won't show his face.

I don't think Superman will be battling Black Adam in the DCEU, not when there's a Shazam family, but let's see sha.


#Xavier
#DCian

abduleez1:

Wetin James Gunn dey do for Harley Quinn

Minemrys:
It's what they call anti climax.

1.) Does anti climax stop a franchise from being rebooted if there's need to? NO.

So what's the argument about?

2.) In a rebooted franchise, will there be changes in characters and arcs? YES.

So what's the argument about?

3.) Is there any law that stops a franchise from being rebooted if there's a hanging story despite the need to reboot? NO

So what exactly is the argument about?

To be sincere, I'm tired of this argument. I'm tired of having to repeat myself over and over and over again. Such argument bores and drains me.

So this is the last time I'm going to respond on this issue, but they're four things you need to know;

1.) No law stops a franchise from being rebooted if there's need to.

2.) In a rebooted franchise, some characters and stories will be erased irrespective of whether they're complete or not, hanging or not, developed or not.

3.) In a rebooted franchise, new characters and stories will be introduced and explored.

4.) Anti climax does not prevent a franchise from being rebooted.

So that's it for me and this argument. I'm done.

You can either choose to keep on complaining why they ended Batfleck arc with the reboot or you can choose to look forward to the plans they have for Keaton's Batman. Your choice

Adieus.


#Xavier
#DCian

Minemrys:
Bros, you don't just reboot a universe when stories are freaking hanging. That's bad story telling. It's like MCU rebooting after Civil War, then bringing back Tobey Maguire's Spiderman.
Does it make any sense?
Which is why the reboot that's being done now, makes sense on the marvel part, cause if they choose to bring back old films, it will be an improvement not a step back cause they have developed the current ones.

Can you show me any law that states that you can't reboot a universe when a story is hanging

There is no such law. Such law doesn't exist, which means a studio can choose to reboot a universe if they feel there's a need to do so. We see cases like that in the comics.

Studios don't just wake up and reboot a franchise. They have to be a reason for them to do so, and if they have that reason then they do it irrespective of whether stories are hanging or not.

So if WB/DC feel that the DCEU should be rebooted which results in certain arcs being wiped off and left hanging, there is nothing wrong with that. There's no law that prevents them from doing so.

It's a matter of choice. So I don't see what this complains are about.

As for marvel studios rebooting the MCU and bringing in Toby's Spiderman.
Marvel will and can reboot the universe if and only if they see a need to but if there's no reason for them to do so, they won't.
And if there's a reason for reboot which they decide to do and they choose to bring in Toby's Spiderman, so far they're going to establish a story arc for him, moving forward in the rebooted universe, then there's nothing senseless about that

Don't forget, if our reality is to bee rebooted, some persons will be wiped off resulting in their story arcs being left hanging. So if this is the case, I don't see why this is a problem in the DCEU.


So technically, I don't see why you're just making a fuss over it.
Always remember, there's no one way to run a franchise and if such is to happen in our reality, the outcome will be similar.


#Xavier
#DCian

This is a scene on the argument of Man of Steel in my book, IDEAL, that is currently in writing. Just thought I should share


".....to me Man Of Steel is one of the greatest comic book movies or CBMs ever made," Xavier declared.

"Really!?" Danjuma said. "Too bad, because to me, that movie was a disappointment."

"And why? If I may ask," that was Dafe. The guys are in Danjuma's living room, keeping themselves entertained with bowls of chin chin and grilled steaks and a bottle of champagne.

"Man Of Steel wasn't a Superman movie, it was rather a Henry Cavil's movie trying to play Superman. The Superman I saw wasn't the Superman I know, that was an entirely new person. I'm still trying to figure out how Superman became one dark toned melancholic character, how did a Superman movie become a dark toned movie? When did Superman start killing? When did Superman started not caring about the lives of people during a battle? Me personally, I won't rank it among my top three best Superman films. It was a downfall from the Superman I know," Danjuma stated.

"So those are your reasons for your disappointment in the movie?" Dafe said.

"Definitely."

"Okay, permission to engage you on that," Xavier volunteered, ready to play Man Of Steel apologist.

"You're free. Let's see if you can de-orient me."

"The floor is yours Dr X," Bem said teasingly.

"Goat," Xavier jeered.

"You mean Greatest Of All Time, I can't agree less," Bem said dramatically.

"No I mean, ewu...ewu mbeee. Goat... animal goat," Xavier fired playfully.

"Anyways..." Xavier waved it off. "Let me start with Superman not caring about the lives of people. We need to understand here that the destruction on Metropolis wasn't caused by Superman but Zod who was hell bent on fighting in that city. Secondly, there's no way two powered beings like Superman and Zod will be engaged in a battle that destruction of such magnitude won't happen. We've seen it in similar movies, so I wonder what all the fuss is about."

"Superman should have led Zod out of the city," Danjuma objected.

"Not when Zod is hell bent on wrecking disaster on the people of Metropolis and Earth. That wouldn't have been possible cos the idiot wouldn't have budged or he would have always found a way to come back. Aside that, there was a Krypton terraforming technology somewhere on Earth attempting to terraform the planet wrecking destruction on cities in the process. So with that in mind, of what use will Superman taking Zod out of Metropolis be when the Metropolis will still and was still being destroyed thanks to the terraforming technology? So you see, there's nothing Superman could have done to prevent Metropolis from being destroyed by his battle with Zod, not when Zod is hell bent on wrecking havoc."

"Aside that, such destruction is synonymous with Superman movies. Lots of Superman films, both live action and animation, have such destruction, and guess what? Nobody criticizes those films base on that, but all of a sudden, when same is replicated in Man Of Steel, it becomes a sin. It seems to me that critics of that are either being bias for reasons best known to them or they're shiting on the movie for some other unknown reason. Only them know."

"Now to the issue of Superman killing or in this case snapping Zod's neck. In cases like this, the question I do ask is, what other ways could Zod had been defeated?" Xavier quizzed.
"Well, he could have been severely decapitated, hurled into space, sent back to the phantom zone or even defeated with a kryptonite," Danjuma answered.

"Let's take a look at your suggestions. You need to understand that Zod is the evil version of Superman. The power Superman possesses, he possesses. What empowers Superman, empowers him. What weakens Superman, weakens him. So do you really think that decapitating or hurling him into space or imprisoning him would have stopped him? What stops him from healing, all thanks to the sun. What stops him from finding his way back to Earth to complete what he started? Don't forget Zod is hell bent on destroying Earth for the sake of Krypton. What stops him from breaking off from his imprisonment. So you see the decapitation or space hurling won't work."

"What about the use of kryptonite?" That was Bem.

"If you were Superman would you reveal your weakness to the world considering how that might make you vulnerable to the government and other malevolent humans especially at such early time? Nobody in his right senses would have done that. Such sacrifice is very risky, it's not worth it."

"As for the issue of the phantom zone. You need to understand that the phantom zone isn't activated by a phantom zone projector but a technical process. The phantom zone projector wasn't brought into the universe in other to avoid major loop holes. Think about it, if the phantom zone projector exist, anytime the Justice League are facing a powerful villain, the next thing will be to utilize the projector on the villain. Now how will that make sense? Won't that ruin the DCEU? Think about that. Have you ever wondered why the mother box was destroyed in Zack Snyder's Justice League or why there had to be a flashpoint event? Certain things have to be done to eliminate loop holes in a franchise."

"Aside that, while will Jor El put a phantom zone projector in the ship of baby Kal El? Why? Considering how dangerous that will be. What if there's a mishap in space and that projector is activated, what will happen to the baby? No sensible father will make such move."

"Now to the technical process of activating the phantom zone, that was done which led to Zod's soldiers, Faora-Ul and Colonel Nathan Hardy to be sent into the phantom zone but unfortunately Superman and Zod were not close by, they were elsewhere fighting, so the phantom zone couldn't get them. And the phantom zone due to the technical process involved in activating it could only be activated once at that time, so which now leave us with the only option Superman had, kill Zod."

"The only way to stop Zod is to kill him just like the only way to stop Thanos or Darkseid or Doomsday is to kill them. They're certain people whose existence is a threat. Those people shouldn't be alive, that's the only way the world can be safe. Zod is one of those people, he had to die. Superman did what he had to do to save lives. Superman doesn't kill except if that's the only way like in the case of Doomsday. Killing Doomsday is the only way to stop him or it, same thing with Zod considering their power level. So Superman did what needed to be done to save Earth and that family that was about to be lasered."

"But even after snapping Zod's neck, Superman himself felt the impact of his actions which could be see in his grief."

"We shouldn't also forget that Superman wasn't Superman yet in Man Of Steel, not even in BvS, he was still trying to be Superman," Dafe chipped in.

"I disagree with that. What makes Superman, Superman? His decision to take on that mantle and the responsibility it held. That's what makes him Superman, so the moment he donned that suit, bore the mantle and it's responsibility, he became Superman. As for his values, he was taught such by his adopted parents. The values Superman possess wasn't learnt from Jor El or Krypton or a Superman training institute, rather it was his adopted parents that inculcated such into him. So the whole 'Superman killed because he wasn't yet Superman' is false. Superman killed because it was the only way to stop Zod. Due to the values he possessed, all thanks to his adopted parents, he felt the impact of his killing causing him to grief."

"Despite the fact that I love Man Of Steel and it's matured and realistic take on Superman, I can't just help but admit that I aren't a fan of it's dark tone or seriousness. Like why make Superman dark in tone? Why make him all serious and melancholic? What was the essence? Superman has always been a balanced toned character, why didn't they just leave him at that?" Xavier said.

"Well that's because of it's matured and realistic theme," Dafe said in response.

"Sweetheart, maturity as regards motion picture, has to do with quality and not it's tone. A movie can be light toned and still be matured like wise a movie can be all serious and be immatured. Saying dark tone equates to maturity is like someone saying that a dark toned or serious person is a matured person, that's hogwash. When it comes to humans, what makes one matured is intelligence, intrepid and responsibility and not dark tone or seriousness. So which means a light toned person can be matured and a dark tonal person can be immatured. Same way when it comes to films, quality is what defines maturity and not the tone, except one is speaking in context otherwise if you're going with the general or expanded meaning of it, maturity is quality."

"As for the realistic theme. What makes a film realistic is not the tone rather it's the concept being explored. Realism has nothing to do with the tone but the concept being explored, which means, a light tonal film can be realistic and a dark tonal film can be unrealistic. Shazam was realistic despite being light toned. Aquaman, Captain America: Winter Soldier, Captain America: Civil War were realistic despite being balanced toned. Shazam dealt with the issue of child abandonment, orphanhood, teenage rebellion, child abuse and it's accompanying trauma, family, teenage curiousity of the adult life etc. Aquaman dealt with the issue of pollution, racial discrimination, racial intolerance and racial hate, forced or arranged marriage etc. Winter Soldier and Civil War dealt with issues of political corruption and political interference in the activities of the heroes. All this are realistic concepts present in these movies making them realistic films despite their tone. Man Of Steel was realistic not because of it's dark tone but because of it's realistic concept. So the idea that Man Of Steel is dark in tone because of it's realistic theme is false."

"So there was absolutely no reason for that movie to be dark in tone. They should have made it balanced instead. Imagine a Superman movie with the Man Of Steel quality and an Aquaman or Civil War or Winter Soldier tone, such movie would have been a blockbuster, a billion dollar grosser, a certified one at that. It would have been well received but that wasn't the case thanks in part to it's dark tone."

"The movie was inspired by The Dark Knight trilogy but hey, Batman has always been a dark toned character so the dark tone of the TDK trilogy suited him unlike Man Of Steel for Superman. There are certain things about a character that should be left unchanged. Superman is a balanced toned character and they should have left him as that. Man Of Steel should have been balanced in tone. Aside that, Man Of Steel was a god tier movie," Xavier expressed


#Xavier
#DCian
#IDEAL

Minemrys:
Keaton's arc was never in a Cinematic Universe, and from what I recall, it fleshed out its character with 2 stand alone films. Affleck's character didn't have much of a development other than what the plot gave him.
There was a lot that was built about Bruce.
You want to reboot it, then reboot it with a continuity that doesn't drag the plot backwards. This shit just took us back 30 years. There really is no point bringing back Keaton.
Bro, you are a writer, you know this. This is just zig zag story telling not creativity.
You can defend it all you want but if there's a story hanging, and just for no reason, you leave it half way to go and concentrate on another story that doesn't improve what you have built, it's plain stupid.
If the plan is to bring back Affleck later on, why introduce Keaton? I have nothing against Keaton but I am all for continuity.

As I have said, the universe is being rebooted and as a result of that, lots of stories will be discarded, lots of stories will be introduced.

It doesn't matter whether an arc was originally part of the universe or not, the reboot chops it off or keeps it or introduces it.

Whether Batfleck arc is hanging or not, it doesn't mean anything. If the reoot demands his arc to be cut off, it will.

As I also said, Batfleck is not the only Batman with an arc and nothing stops his arc from being affected by the rebooted timeline. Nothing also stops a new Keaton's Batman arc from being introduced and explored.

Ask yourself, if our reality is to be rebooted, don't you think some arc will be wiped off? Of course they will. In the case of the DCEU Batfleck arc just happened to be one of those arcs.

It's not zig zag story telling, this is because same process will occur, if it's to be applied in reality. If reality is to be rebooted, some people and their arcs will be wiped off from existence. So yes, it's not a zig zag story telling pattern rather it's a realistic process or concept if applied to reality.

Besides, the rebooting model has been used to reset and change the DC universe numerous times in the comics which led to lots of characters and arcs been erased especially undeveloped ones. So I wonder why it's an issue when it comes to the DCEU and it's Batman.

Also, they aren't taking us back 30 years backwards because Keaton's Batman exist in the present albeit in a different universe and also the reboot merges two universe together. I don't see how that takes us back 30 years.

Batfleck isn't returning, not to my knowledge. Keaton is taking his place as the new Batman. Keaton's Batman will usher in his own arc into the DCEU which will begin at Batgirl and end in JL 3 or 4.

As for continuity, the Snyder continuity will be erased and a new continuity will be introduced after the Flash movie. Batfleck has no business with the new continuity. So whatever significant role he played was in the old continuity and they will be of no importance in the rebooted continuity. Keaton's Batman is going to have a significant role in the rebooted continuity and that's what WBD/ DC is focused on.

You should should stop bothering about the past and what should have been and instead focus on the present and what's coming.


#Xavier
#DCian

Why do I have this feeling that the exposed and apparently disbanded Task Force X (or Suicide Squad) will be revived as Checkmate and probably under the United Nations Security Council


#Xavier
#DCian

Nickshrapnel:
The Flash movie will tell us who the DCEU Batman is.

Next year would be a real hard year for WBD, how till they promote Aquaman/Flash?

That one is not a problem. Amber Heard and Ezra Miller are not the only people associated with this movies. There are other fan favorites like James Wan, Andy, Jason Momoa, Ben Affleck, Micheal Keaton, Abdul Mateen, Patrick Wilson etc associated with this movies.

All they have to do is

* Eliminate Amber and Miller from promotion.
* Profusely utilise the fan favourites for and during promotion.
* Fire and disassociate themselves from Miller and Amber which they have done.
* Recast their characters.
* If necessary, make certain donations to the victims of Miller and hire Johnny Depp for a movie role.

If effectively done, nothing will happen to the performance of these movies, as a matter of fact it may even end up becoming a positive publicity.

Flash and Aquaman 2 are bigger than Amber and Miller.


#Xavier
#DCian

.

Minemrys:
Who is even the DCEU Batman?
Seriously, I don't see the point bringing Michael Keaton back. Plot wise they should have gone with Jeffrey Dean Morgan. That would have been a more compelling story that would be a development to Ben Affleck's Batman. Michael Keaton as Batman just takes everything backwards when Batfleck isn't even developed.
It's just chaotic story telling to me.
The flash film will so receive a lot of hate cause what I am hearing from those who went for the test screening is that the story is just average.
Only thing that was praised was Miller's acting.

The DCEU Batman is Micheal Keaton. This is seen in his appearance in Batgirl, a movie set after the Flashpoint, a rebooted era.

There is nothing wrong in bringing in Micheal Keaton's Batman. This is because they are going with the rebooting model. When you're rebooting a universe, things change. Whatever has been in existence is subject to change. Some things will be eliminated, some thngs will be brought in while otuers will still be around.

If they are rebooting the universe whatever arc they set up with Batfleck will be wiped off and they will continue with a new arc with Keaton's Batman. Batfleck is not the only Batman with an arc, Keaton's Batman also has an arc or will also have an arc which they will establish and explore.

So I don't see any problem with this route WBD/ DC have chosen to tow.


#Xavier
#DCian

abduleez1:
****

If this is true then these confirms my hypothesis that the DCEU Batman won't be getting any solo movie of his own rather he will be in JL movies and a supporting character in movies that involves him with plans to give him a heroic farewell in JL 3 or 4.

We will be getting Batman movies in Battinson.


#Xavier
#DCian

BankyGee:
Happy birthday to me guys!

I thought it's 22nd.

Anyways........

The Justice Society characters will be having their individual Black Adam prequel comics

Promotional posters (cont'd)

Promotional Posters

Nickshrapnel:
It’s not a spin-off There is no official announcement to say it is

Omoh, I dey gbadun this thread

abduleez1 vs SMAUG (Original Vawulence)

SMAUG vs GloriousGbola (Spin off )

SMUAG:
Do you even know Black Adam at all. So Black Adam talks like American now. Ogbeni, make we Just enjoy the movie and move on.
All the actions look fantastic!!!!

So accent is the only thing that made Black Adam, Black Adam. His ruthlessness, his brutality, his fierceness his rage, his ambition, his power, his darkness, his tragedy, all of this aren't part of his personality bah. So because accent is missing means he is not playing Black Adam despite his other attributes being supposedly present.

Scarlett Black Widow never had the Russian accent, not to the best of my knowledge but did that stop Scarlett from being a good Black Widow?

People will just look for something to give themselves headache over.

Accent is not what makes Black Adam, Black Adam. They're other attributes of him and if Dwayne Johnson is able to portray them, accent or no accent, then he plays Black Adam. He doesn't need the accent, the accent is not compulsory, it is good to have it but it's not compulsory.

But the issue of Dwayne Johnson actually being Black Adam or Dwayne Johnson will be revealed when the movie releases.

#Xavier
#DCian

The hierarchy of power is about to change in the DC universe

abduleez1:
Here they come....

And they expect WB/DC to restore the snyderverse with this level of toxicity. I will have to become an atheist again, before WB/DC do that, arrant nonsense


#Xavier
#DCian

abduleez1:
It's fvvking here!!
The hierarchy of power is about to CHANGE.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaV7mmc9HGw

GOD TIER. OMOH, SUPERMAN AND SHAZAM DEY LEARN WORK WHERE THIS ONE DAY

YOU COULD FEEL THE POWER, THE RAGE, THE PASSION.

THE HIERARCHY OF POWER IS ABOUT TO CHANGE IN THE DC UNIVERSE.

THE SCENES WERE BLACK ADAM THREW THAT THUG INTO THE SKY AND SLAMMED ON THE FIGHTER JET WERE FVCKING HILARIOUS

FROM THE LOOK OF THINGS, DWAYNE JOHNSON ISN'T PLAYING DWAYNE JOHNSON BUT BLACK ADAM. HE MAY BE VERSATILE IN THIS MOVIE AS HE PROMISED BUT LET'S WAIT AND SEE.

I CAN'T WAIT FOR OCTOBER 21


#XAVIER
#DCian

abduleez1:
Zaslav's plan is already setting on motion.
One month is not enough to set things straight in DC bro. He

I'm not talking about executing his plans, I'm talking about letting us in on his plans even if it's just a glimpse. One month is more than enough to conceive a plan and let the fan base know about it, at least a glimpse if not all of it.


#Xavier
#DCian

pu7pl3:
Jesus Christ

Is Lord for ever

SMUAG:
Mr rational, I never said MoS was a success (that'swell successful), I only bank on the premise that it was a good start for a universe. Go back and check what brought about this argument rather than thinking you are sounding intelligent...
Put MoS and Shazam's box office numbers and their budgets I will take MoS because the market/audience is already there, what is left is for me to make improvement and am sure to get a better returns... Irrespective of the budget the numbers weren't bad at all to kick start something huge... WB might decided not to do a sequel propabably not because of its box office numbers, but because of how difficult it is to do a believable and compelling story That to them audience can relate with. Mind us, Superman is one of the most difficult character to put a believable movie out there if not the most so it might not necessarily means the other way...

If you read my earlier post, you would have seen where I said,

The reason there is no MoS 2 is not because of its revenue rather because WB/DC, for reasons best known to them, plans to reboot the DCEU via The Flash first before producing the movie.
WB/DC has plans for two superman films (one DCEU movie and val zod series). The movie may not be MoS 2 but it will definitely be a superman movie with Henry Cavill (it is rumoured he will appear in the Flash probably at the end of the movie where the JL of the rebooted DCEU will be introduced).
WB/DC wants to reboot the universe first before they produced critical films like Superman and JL. The series probably will be cancelled but the movie will pull through. After The Flash, the next DCEU movie slate will include JL and Superman movies.

So what's the essence for the argument?


#Xavier
#DCian

SMUAG:
Stop shooting yourself on the feet, cause by this your logic an A-list character at least need to do 800m or billion to see it as successful one so can you call the current The Batman movie a failure even if it turn out profit.... As for me, NO, it was a huge success for a starting point. Your logic supposed to exclude Suicide Squad in that category knowing fully well that it didn't do the 800m or billion mark, and also, the greatest A-list Villain, Joker and over A-list Hero Batman were in that movie since you like grading your failure and success that way...lol Or maybe because it was not directed by Zack so you saw it differently. For me, it was a success regardless of who and who was in it

Dude it's not my logic, it's your logic. That's what you said. According to you, a CBM must gross very high before it is termed a success. I was only pointing the ridiculous of your logic contrary to industry standards, but as usual, all because you want to win an argument, you want to claim I said so. Why don't you me show me where I said so?
If you read my arguments, which you don't, you won't be uttering this nonsense.

One more thing, according to industry standards, high grooser starts from $700M, so yes The Batman and SS is a high grosser contrary to your own conceived ideology.

Was Suicide Squad and The Sucide Squad spin-offs from BvS and the first Suicide Squad since they are both villains from same universe that reference more about their first movie(s)? Especially the first Suicide Squad to BvS... clear me abeg...

A film base on a villain of a character set in the same universe and is connected to that character's movie is a spin off of that character's film.

They're so many examples of spinoffs but this is one of them.

Ask yourself,

1.) Is Suicide Squad and The Suicide Squad base on the BvS' villain? NO
2.) Is SS and TSS about a major character in BvS? NO
3.) Does Wikipedia and the media say SS and TSS are spin off of BvS? NO.
4.) Does Wikipedia and the media say Black Adam is a spin off of Shazam? YES.
5.) Does Wikipedia and the media say BvS and TSS are sequels to MoS and SS respectively? YES.
6.) Does Wikipedia and the media carry verified information? YES.

So what's the argument about? Dude you're just desperate to win an argument to the point you're sounding very ridiculous. It's not about winning an argument, it's about being sensible. You're sounding irrational right now.

Below are screenshots of what I said earlier, take a look at them incase you didn't read them earlier and see how ridiculous your statements are.

To be sincere, I'm tired of this stupid argument, argument where I have to be repeating the same thing over and over to you. This is the last time I will reply you concerning this matter.

#Xavier
#DCian

abduleez1:
It's frustrating already when 9 years on the DCEU still has about 10 fvvking moveis released.
A pitiable stats of just a movie per year.


That's why I scoff when peeps complain of the new projects. I'm just happy we're NOW getting multiple projects at once. The top quality or high profile characters will come sooner rather than later.

Then let him come out with his own plan. It's long overdue. Ever since he took over, all I've been hearing is anger, complains, whining, frustrations and cancellations from him, no plans yet. One month is enough to create a plan, abi he wants to use an entire year to do that?

Is he still going with the current DCEU plan (reboot)? Or he has his own? He should let us know instead of complaining and whining here and there. That's how he will continue until 2022 is over


#Xavier
#DCian

SMUAG:
All this your explanations of spin-off can also serve as sequel or extended universe if you really check what you wrote.. and that is why I said, show me where the director called it a spin-off and I will rest. All spin-off series or movies I have seen or watched, the studio or director always make it clear from the beginning that it's a spin-off, but Black Adam case has been different...

So let me get it straight, a movie about a villain of a character set in the same universe, that is referenced in the movie of that character is not a spin off of that character's movie. So until a filmmaker comes and tell you that it's a spin off before you know it's a spin off. It's common sense. It's like someone saying, carrying satanic Bible to church is not wrong since no one told him so, common sense will tell you that it's not proper to do so. It's not everything the filmmaker will tell you.
Aside that, Wikipedia and the media refers to Black Adam as a spin off. Do you think the media and Wikipedia, especially Wikipedia will refer to Black Adam as a spin off if it isn't? Wikipedia carries verified information, it's not a platform for hoax.
For example: Wikipedia says BvS is a sequel to MoS, this is an information that the studio and Zack has confirmed themselves. In other words, Wikipedia and the media but especially Wikipedia won't and doesn't carry unverified information. If Wikipedia says BvS is a sequel to MoS, then it is. If Wikipedia says Black Adam is a spin off of Shazam, then it is. You don't need a filmmaker to come tell you that, Wikipedia and the media are their mouthpiece.
But if you still want to keep up with the "show me where the filmmaker said it" despite the informations from the media, Wikipedia and common sense, then suit yourself.

Medium grosser and high grosser, another means to massage your ego that Shazam wasn't a flop... Oga, that number na flop category e dey as long as cbm is concerned this days or all the DC fans and main stream audience go for holidays during its released..

If Shazam is a flop then MoS is a flop because the ideology you possessed makes a mess of MoS. According to you, since it's CBM, not just any CBM but an A-list CBM, MoS should gross a billion. As a matter of fact, the minimum MoS should have grossed should be $800M but funny enough it didn't, it is movies like WW, Suicide Squad ($721M) and Aquaman that did.
According to your logic, MoS is a massive flop, but guess what, I'm not using your logic, I'm using industry standard.

Meet an Industry analyst and ask him if MoS or Shazam are flops, his answer will be no, contrary to yours.
As a matter of fact, in Hollywood, the same rules applies for all genres as regards financial analysis. There is no special law assigned to CBMs. If you think such law exist, it's in your head, it's something you conceived, it's not real.

In Hollywood, if a movie irrespective of genre has a budget of $100M and below, they're regarded as medium or low budgeted movies, and for such films,to determine their success, high grosser is not been considered rather emphasis is on profitability. That doesn't mean if such film grosses high, it won't be a acknowledged, it will but the emphasis is not on that.
For high budgeted films, films with over $100M budget, both high grosser and profitability is been considered for it to be termed a success. Most CBMs are high budgeted films which means they need to gross both high and be profitable to be seen as successful except the very few CBMs that are low or medium budgeted.

So according to industry standards, MoS isn't a flop but a disappointment while Shazam is a success. It doesn't matter whether you agree with it or not, that's the standard industry rule, not some made up shit.

Or are you trying to say that if a movie budget is 500m and it grossed 1.2b and another movie budget is 150m and it grossed 450m, so we should let go the one with 1.2b just because it's net profit isn't higher....forgetting that, doing that number is a sign that there is a better and potentially better market share/audience for it if they try improve on certain areas....

1.) Going with the 3x multiplier rule to determine BEP, since actual break even point (BEP = production budget + marketing budget) of the films aren't known, the $1.2B movie is a loss while the $450M is even, neither profitable or a loss. This begs the question, what's the essence of grossing $1.2B if you're still going to be a loss? This is business, you look at the returns to the company, not just how much the movie grossed. So yes, going with industry standard, $1.2B film is a massive flop while the $450M is neither flop or success.

2.) MoS with a budget of $200M never grossed one billion, it couldn't even grossed $700M. It struggled to gross $668M and churned in a profit of a meager $42M while Shazam with a $100M budget, despite grossing $363M raked in a profit of $73M.
So between MoS and Shazam, which one is more successful? Industry standard says Shazam but your ideology says none.

3.) Both films are high budgeted films, $500M and $150M respectively, which means, according to industry standard, for them to be successful, they will have to gross high and be profitable, of which both of them failed.
Film A grossed high, $1.2B, but didn't make profit but rather a loss of $300M while Film B was a medium grosser, $450M and was neither profitable nor a loss.
But in the case of MoS and Shazam, MoS is a high budgeted movie ($200M) while Shazam is a medium or low budgeted movie ($100M). Between the two, any movie that has the burden of grossing high according to industry standards, is MoS but it failed, grossing medium of $668M and raking in a meager $42M unlike Shazam who is free from such high grosser burden. All it needs to do is to be profitable and it was well profitable with $73M.
So once again, according to industry standards, Shazam is a success while MoS isn't a failure albeit a disappointment. Any contrary view, is in your head.


#Xavier
#DCian

SMUAG:
So is it not the same thing that BvS was a work that focus on more details and different aspects from the original work too.
Black Adam and Shazam sharing similar and identical stories from one universe or comic do not mean it is a spin-off. I bet if Black Adam was released first we wouldn't be hearing this thing of Shazam being spin-off.
If it's a spin-off, by now we would have heard it countless times from WB and the director but they have not...

That moment when someone wants to win an argument by all means but they end up sounding ridiculous. It's not about winning an argument, it's about making sense.

* Facts: Black Adam is the spin off of Shazam just like Peacemaker is to TSS.
A spin off is a film that branches out from an existing film or franchise and has connections to it.
Black Adam was originally meant to be in Shazam but the studio decided that he should have his own movie but not without referencing him in Shazam.
Aside that, Black Adam is scheduled as the nemesis of Shazam in the DCEU which means he stems out of Shazam. A movie based on the villain of a character in a franchise is a spin off of that character. The studio or filmmaker doesn't have to tell you, it's common sense.
Black Adam movie exist because Shazam exist. If there was no Shazam, they wouldn't have been Black Adam, not in the DCEU.

* Facts: Shazam is more profitable than MoS with a net profit of $73M to MoS' $42M just like Suicide Squad is more profitable than BvS with $158M to $103M.
Funny enough, it had to take MoS grossing $668M to have a profit of just $42M, imagine if Shazam had grossed MoS numbers.
And according to industry standard, MoS isn't a high grosser. High grossing starts from $700M, while medium grosser is from $300M to $699.9M. MoS just like Shazam is a medium grosser, they're both in the same category.

* Facts: MoS 2 wasn't part of Snyder original plan. Before you argue unnecessarily, do me a favour and find out his original plan. The movies slated were;
MoS, BvS, SS, WW, JL, Aquaman, Cyborg, Flash, GL, The Batman, JL 2 and JL 3.
Every other rumoured movie were either just rumours or were movies that were to be take place after Snyder had either rebooted the DCEU or time jumped it 20 to 30 year into the future, which was a wonky plan by the way.
So if Snyder was still in charge, you wouldn't have gotten MoS 2.
NEWS FLASH: According to Snyder, BvS is the sequel to MoS. If you want to argue with that, take your argument to Zack.

* Facts: The reason there is no MoS 2 is not because of its revenue rather because WB/DC, for reasons best known to them, plans to reboot the DCEU via The Flash first before producing the movie.
WB/DC has plans for two superman films (one DCEU movie and val zod series). The movie may not be MoS 2 but it will definitely be a superman movie with Henry Cavill (it is rumoured he will appear in the Flash probably at the end of the movie where the JL of the rebooted DCEU will be introduced).
WB/DC wants to reboot the universe first before they produced critical films like Superman and JL. The series probably will be cancelled but the movie will pull through. After The Flash, the next DCEU movie slate will include JL and Superman movies.
If you have been following DC infos, you should have known about this, they wouldn't have been need for all this noise about MoS 2.


#Xavier
#DCian