The Inhumans

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
Man of Steel's budget is $225 million while Avengers was $220 million. Christ, DC probably spent most of that money in the depiction of Earth and Metropolis being destroyed. They could have save tens of millions by cutting down half of that destruction and likely still would have had epic battles that satisfied fans.

DC should look for talent that fits the role and not 5 A-list stars. Marvel picks B-list actors from the start and groom them to stardom. B-talents and unknowns are gold mines; you get talents at a discount.

Robert Downey Jr and Gweneth Paltrow are A list actors, IMO. Robert has had a shaky career (personal problems), but is still cream of the crop. You can say the same for Edward Norton Jr and even Scarlet Johanson.

WB going after Margot Robbie (who is less known than Scarlet) and Tom Hardy is an excellent move. Any director and or actors would want to work with Hardy. He's an excellent actor.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Robert has had a shaky career (personal problems), but is still cream of the crop.

Of course...those were his younger days but he's over all of that.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Of course...those were his younger days but he's over all of that.

I never said he wasn't. Just pointing out that one of the reasons he was out of the spotlight was because of his drug problems. Before that, he was widely known for his 80's movies (Bratpack) and his Oscar nominated performance, Chaplin. Downey Jr. has pretty much always been an A list actor. He's more widely known, of course, because of Iron Man. But always been an A lister.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Robert Downey Jr and Gweneth Paltrow are A list actors, IMO. Robert has had a shaky career (personal problems), but is still cream of the crop. You can say the same for Edward Norton Jr and even Scarlet Johanson.

WB going after Margot Robbie (who is less known than Scarlet) and Tom Hardy is an excellent move. Any director and or actors would want to work with Hardy. He's an excellent actor.

Paltrow wasn't the star and so she wasn't going to bust their wallet. They were willing to pay Terrence 4.5 million but then dropped him when he expected 8 million for the sequel. Downey made less than a million in the first Iron Man movie. They paid him more for the sequel because of him and the film's performance.

Norton was the only A list star in Hulk. Scarlett had a minor role when she just began. Her big role was in Avengers and by that point Marvel was rolling in success and moola. Suicide Squad is not even close to Avengers in terms of public awareness. Avengers wasn't even that well known compared to say X-Men and Wonder Woman to the public. Suicide Squad? Good luck with that.

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
Paltrow wasn't the star and so she wasn't going to bust their wallet. They were willing to pay Terrence 4.5 million but then dropped him when he expected 8 million for the sequel. Downey made less than a million in the first Iron Man movie. They paid him more for the sequel because of him and the film's performance.

Norton was the only A list star in Hulk. Scarlett had a minor role when she just began. Her big role was in Avengers and by that point Marvel was rolling in success and moola. Suicide Squad is not even close to Avengers in terms of public awareness. Avengers wasn't even that well known compared to say X-Men and Wonder Woman to the public. Suicide Squad? Good luck with that.

I'm not talking about money as being a factor in determining A list. I'm talking more in terms of TALENT. Supposedly, the only A list actor who will ask for a lot is Will Smith (who isn't even confirmed). Tom Hardy, Margot Robbie, and Jai Courney isn't going to break WB's wallet, either.

When WB hired Christian Bale, he wasn't A list yet.
Same with Henry Cavill.

WhiteWitchKing is right. If WB knew how to spot the right talent for the right character, as in the perfect fit like RDJ was for IM and Chris Pratt was for Starlord, then it would save them a lot of money. And it would improve their films, because it would improve their eye for spotting talent, rather than already established talented stars.

Also he's right that MOS costing almost as much as Avengers, shows they are still spending too much hoping to make some profit from it. Worked for MOS, but they have to cut that down otherwise they will lose money on a project and then run away from doing superhero movies again. Which is exactly what happened with GL and SR. The problem wasn't that they sucked, anyone can make a sucky movie from time to time. The problem was the loss they made on them put them off doing superhero movies aside from Batman for a long time.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
WhiteWitchKing is right. If WB knew how to spot the right talent for the right character, as in the perfect fit like RDJ was for IM and Chris Pratt was for Starlord, then it would save them a lot of money. And it would improve their films, because it would improve their eye for spotting talent, rather than already established talented stars.

Also he's right that MOS costing almost as much as Avengers, shows they are still spending too much hoping to make some profit from it. Worked for MOS, but they have to cut that down otherwise they will lose money on a project and then run away from doing superhero movies again. Which is exactly what happened with GL and SR. The problem wasn't that they sucked, anyone can make a sucky movie from time to time. The problem was the loss they made on them put them off doing superhero movies aside from Batman for a long time.

Er, so I guess Henry Cavill, Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Jeremy Irons, Margot Robbie are such horrible choices. WB has done fine in the past and continue to do so.

Grabbing someone like Ben Affleck was a wise choice. He is a wealth of knowledge in the industry that will garner a lot of money in the long run. You have to think long term for him. His solo batman movies if he does them will make a lot of money for the studio and will probably have strong critical success.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Er, so I guess Henry Cavill, Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Jeremy Irons, Margot Robbie are such horrible choices. WB has done fine in the past and continue to do so.

Well yeah that's true. You've got me there. None of those guys were super famous before their DC movie roles. But all talented and good fits. Henry Caville is a pretty perfect Superman 👆

If you guys are complaining so much about these "4-5 A list actors" exactly WHOM are you talking about? For one, there isn't that many A list stars in the industry that make a crap load of money. Someone like Tom Hardy isn't A list. Someone like Margot Robbie isn't A list (Who might play Harley), etc... The ONLY A list by definition is Will Smith.

BTW, if Suicide Squad gets Will Smith, this movie will automatically get it's money back and then some. Will Smith is a bankable star overseas. Just look at his flops. They suck domestically, but do well overseas. Wise move to get him, simply for that reason alone.

Will Smith is well worth the money.

With the exception of Lex and Wonder Woman, WB has casted really well. Lex and Wondy could still work out, but there were soooo many better choices. Also, I wish they were going with an older, established Lex Luthor rather than young and inexperienced.

Anyways, star power shouldn't be too big of a factor when it comes to casting. The best actor should be cast.

Will Smith has been on the decline as a ticket seller for years now.

Hey guys your getting off topic, take it to the correct thread please

Originally posted by Inhuman
Will Smith has been on the decline as a ticket seller for years now.

Most big name stars do, because we don't live in that age, anymore. However, he's still a decent draw overseas.

As an actor, Will Smith remains A List level. The box office drop in recent years has more to do with his movies sucking.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Most big name stars do, because we don't live in that age, anymore. However, he's still a decent draw overseas.

Originally posted by Firefly218
As an actor, Will Smith remains A List level. The box office drop in recent years has more to do with his movies sucking.

Meh. I know he is a good actor im just saying he doesn't have the boxoffice pull he used to. Good movie or not.

Meaning if the next block buster came out and I see "starting WILL SMITH" I don't think "aw man this will be awesome" like I used to maybe a decade ago. Now I think... " damn they could have got another person 🙁 "

Like for example if they make "HALF-LIFE" the movie or "HALO", "METAL GEAR SOLID" or if "Black Panther"(if will smith was T'challa), etc or another sure fire blockbuster and the main star is will smith.. I think that would be a negative for the movie more so than a positive.

imo.

actually now-a-days will have pretty much become a promoter for his son to become a star

Originally posted by Inhuman
Meh. I know he is a good actor im just saying he doesn't have the boxoffice pull he used to. Good movie or not.

Meaning if the next block buster came out and I see "starting WILL SMITH" I don't think "aw man this will be awesome" like I used to maybe a decade ago. Now I think... " damn they could have got another person 🙁 "

Like for example if they make "HALF-LIFE" the movie or "HALO", "METAL GEAR SOLID" or if "Black Panther"(if will smith was T'challa), etc or another sure fire blockbuster and the main star is will smith.. I think that would be a negative for the movie more so than a positive.

imo.

actually now-a-days will have pretty much become a promoter for his son to become a star

I agree with you. It's not the age of the star anymore. It's more the era of the director. Or that's what they say. However, out of mostly any other star out there, he draws the most audience, I think.

Other than Robert Downey Jr, of course.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Er, so I guess Henry Cavill, Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Jeremy Irons, Margot Robbie are such horrible choices. WB has done fine in the past and continue to do so.

Grabbing someone like Ben Affleck was a wise choice. He is a wealth of knowledge in the industry that will garner a lot of money in the long run. You have to think long term for him. His solo batman movies if he does them will make a lot of money for the studio and will probably have strong critical success.

That's great, but they still overspent on Man of Steel. Had that movie flopped what would DC cinema look like now? It made $291 million but part of that revenue has to split with the theaters. The $225 million isn't including marketing cost. So we don't even know how much Man of Steel actually made in profit.

We'll see what WB does because GL, SR, and MOS all overspent. As for Batman, that's mostly Nolan's work. He picked great actors that were mostly B-listers at the time. It's fair to say WB has a spending problem given their previous history with DC movies.

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
That's great, but they still overspent on Man of Steel. Had that movie flopped what would DC cinema look like now? It made $291 million but part of that revenue has to split with the theaters. The $225 million isn't including marketing cost. So we don't even know how much Man of Steel actually made in profit.

We'll see what WB does because GL, SR, and MOS all overspent. As for Batman, that's mostly Nolan's work. He picked great actors that were mostly B-listers at the time. It's fair to say WB has a spending problem given their previous history with DC movies.

Perhaps, but remember MOS made much of that money back through product placement.

Despite boasting a production budget of around $225 million, it looks like Warners won't have to wait long for its Superman reboot "Man of Steel" to get into the black.

Advertising Age and THR report that Warners has already recouped almost three-quarters of that budget before it has opened at the box-office.

With the help of around one hundred global promotional partners, the film has chalked up a collective $170 million in product placement and promotional support deals with the likes of Gillette, Mattel, Walmart, Fisher Price, Lego, Converse, Chrysler, Hershey, Nokia, Sears, Carl's Jr., Roebuck & Co., Hardee, Kellogg, Kinetics, Warby Parker and even the U.S. Army National Guard.

That number tops the seventy total promotional partners which Universal's "The Lorax" had early last year, and the $150 million that "The Dark Knight Rises" scored for its collective promotional support.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/27365/-man-of-steel-is-already-near-profit

So, it looks like MOS was pretty profitable. AND you have to consider DVD/Blue Ray sales, which surpassed even Iron Man 3.

^ Oh MOS definitely made lots of profit. There would be no announced DC Slate if it didn't.

But not every DC movie can be expected to gross that much, or make such a huge chunk of it's budget back through sponsorships.

They WILL have to learn to watch their budget, or this whole Slate will be cancelled just as it gets started.

Anyway Back on topic- I'd prefer Vin Diesel to play Gorgon. Then get someone awesome to play Black Bolt. Problem is who will jump in to play a character who doesn't speak? Maybe for that reason Vin should play BB and they should get a better actor to play Gorgon.