Box Office: DC Films And Dark Universe Killed Hollywoods Addiction To Cinematic Universes – Forbes

Ezra Miller, Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot in Zack Snyder and Joss Whedon's 'Justice League'

New updates from Warner Bros. DC Films franchise and Universals monster movies signal the end of Hollywood studios chasing their own MCU-style cinematic universe.

Variety recently dropped an update on the ongoing adventures of DC Films. There were plenty of juicy DC Films tidbits, namely J.J. Abrams potentially producing a Superman flick, Michael B. Jordan having conversations about playing Superman (which were merely conversations, since Jordan has 525,600 projects in development), more stand-alone projects, including various support cast members of The Batman having clauses for potential spin-offs and the fact that Jokers success and the assimilation of Deadpool into the MCU may leave DC with an in for R-rated comic book flicks.Meanwhile, Deadline and others announced that Elizabeth Banks would be directing and starring in The Invisible Woman. This film will be disconnected from Leigh Whannells upcoming Invisible Man movie, and it apparently came about because Universal like Banks pitch and snatched it up. Thats also how they ended up with Paul Feigs Dark Army and Dexter Fletchers Renfield.

These two items mark a certain new normal in Hollywood. What youll notice in both the Variety article and the various Universal monster movies developments is an explicit lack of connectivity. Its no secret that the post-Justice League designs for DC Films were less interconnected and less focused on theoretically mimicking the MCU playbook. To be fair, Id argue this was always the plan after Zack Snyders Superman trilogy, with the Man of Steel, Dawn of Justice and Justice League acting as a three-part series premiere. However, the blow-out successes of the mostly stand-alone Wonder Woman ($821 million) and Aquaman ($1.148 billion), along with the jaw-dropping $1.031 billion (and counting) success of Joker sealed the deal. No matter how connected Bride of Frankenstein was going to be to The Mummy ($408 million), the total rejection of that Tom Cruise flick left Dark Universe irreparably tainted.

Russell Crow, Javier Bardem, Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp and Sofia Boutella promoting Universal's late ... [+] "Dark Universe."

DC Films at least boasted high grossers with some very passionate fans, like Batman v Superman ($873 million), Man of Steel ($668 million) and Suicide Squad ($745 million). Conversely, the Dark Universe, initially meant to kick off an interconnected series of fantasy/action/horror movies starring the likes of Tom Cruise, Javier Bardem and Johnny Depp, is only associated with one movie that too few folks saw and even fewer liked. It would be like if the MCUs first and only shot at the title was The Incredible Hulk ($267 million). So, the next batch of Universal monster movies will be stand-alone, mid-to-low-budget, horror-centric, topically minded studio programmers, presumably involving eclectic filmmakers, that will be essentially green-lit on a case-by-case basis. Under the protection of Jurassic World, Fast & Furious, Blumhouse flicks and Will Packer movies, the success or failure of these films wont define the studio.

That doesnt mean Shazam! cant reference Batman v Superman or Aquaman cant acknowledge Justice League, but its hard to do a DC Films Universe when Superman (Henry Cavill), Batman (Ben Affleck) and Joker (Jared Leto) have been displaced or recast for unrelated stand-alone movies. Ditto Dark Universe, now that Universal has struck out with big-budget versions of The Wolfman, The Mummy, Dracula (Dracula Untold) and whatever the hell Van Helsing was back in 2004. For now, the focus over at DC Films is what it arguably should have been in the first place, namely crafting a variety of DC Comics movies that would supplement, but not entirely account for, Warner Bros. theatrical box office viability on a year-to-year basis. Likewise, these Universal monster movies will be just movies and only responsible for their own respective success or failure. Moreover, they wont have to share a universe.

'Solo: A Star Wars Story'

Thats the big takeaway. DC Films and the Dark Universe were the two most high-profile attempts to replicate the carefully constructed (and occasionally lucky) success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and both franchises are either dead and buried or retrofitted into a brand more than a connected narrative franchise. 6.5 years after The Avengers sent Hollywood chasing their own tails for their own cinematic universes, Hollywood no longer sees the cinematic universe as the ultimate goal. Transformers: The Last Knight did not spawn a Transformers cinematic universe, Bumblebee ended up serving as a soft reboot, Foxs X-Men series is done and the Star Wars Story pitches seem destined for Disney+ TV shows. Give or take however DC Films chooses to intermingle their movies, its now back down to the Marvel Cinematic Universe and, somewhat amusingly, Warner Bros. and New Lines low-budget the Conjuring Universe.

WBs MonsterVerse may come to an end unless Godzilla Vs. Kong does gonzo bananas business (compared to, say, the $570 million earned by Skull Island), and that could be it save for whatever comes of Sonys Spider-Verse movies. Id wager that Universals Hobbs & Shaw ($759 million worldwide) was more about spawning a potential replacement for Fast & Furious as opposed to an intermingling F&F universe. But after Justice League stumbled ($659 million, but on a $300 million budget) and Solo bombed ($394 million worldwide on a $275 million budget), Hollywood finally realized that what worked for Marvel wasnt going to work for every fantasy IP even within the superhero sub-genre. DC Films is now whatever DC Comics movies Warner Bros. chooses to make while Universal is just greenlighting whichever smaller-budget monster movies show up with the best pitch. That seems refreshingly old fashioned.

'Joker'

The cinematic universe as an abstract concept which would appeal to moviegoers was always a fallacy. Audiences showed up to The Avengers because it was a unique (at that time) gimmick and because they had already grown fond of the specific versions of those respective Marvel characters, not because the mere notion of theoretical superheroes (or somewhat known characters) interacting was inherently appealing. And, sure, mistakes were made here and there, and I cant say that Universal and Warner Bros. couldnt have pulled it off had The Mummy and Batman v Superman been better received by audiences. But whats done is done. Moreover, the likes of Wonder Woman 1984 will coexist with Tenant and In the Heights, while Invisible Man will exist alongside Fast & Furious 9 and No Time to Die, not as studio saviors but as (hopefully) one hit movie among other hit movies.

Whether the failures of Justice League, Solo and The Mummy were more responsible than the successes of Wonder Woman, Venom and Deadpool for convincing Hollywood that audiences didnt care about the cinematic universe as an abstract concept, Hollywood is now de-emphasizing the inter-connectivity of their monster movies and superhero flicks while emphasizing their respective stand-alone and/or filmmaker-driven natures. The dark joke is that most MCU movies were themselves pretty stand-alone (you dont need to see Thor: Ragnarok to enjoy Black Panther) and, aside from the Avengers films, only loosely connected to a broader story. Heck, you can even understand/enjoy Avengers: Endgame without seeing a single prior MCU movie just as you could thrill to Fast Five without seeing the prior four Fast and Furious movies. So, in a skewed way, Hollywood kicked its cinematic universe addiction by doing what Marvel had been doing from the beginning.

Read the original here:
Box Office: DC Films And Dark Universe Killed Hollywoods Addiction To Cinematic Universes - Forbes