an entire thread could be filled with their mistakes alone. If I had to pick the one that rankles me the most, it's deliberately marketing Treasure Planet like shit so it could bomb and thus give them the excuse they needed to kill off their 2D studio because "CGI IS NEW N SHIET"
I am starting to notice that this is becoming of a common occurrence where movie studios straight up sabotage their own films by simply not marketing the product. In addition to Warner Bros committing necrophilia with DC, I already discussed the vileness on how WB treats their animated films by basically either doing a half-ass job in marketing or simply not marketing the film at all.
The shitshow of Warner Bros Feature Animation where corporate executives micromanaged the shit out of the studio since their debut with Space Jam (1996).
Fucked over Cats Can't Dance (1997), a musical that I enjoyed watching for being 1940s Hollywood-esque, by not marketing the film at all.
Fucked over Brad Bird and The Iron Giant (1999) by not marketing the film because they were skeptical of animation's success following the failure of the Quest of Camelot, even though it was their fault.
Fucked over Osmosis Jones (2001) with garbage marketing of the film, and Warner Bros' President of Marketing blamed the 2D animation for why the film failed (Archive), even though the live-action scenes were disgusting and sus as hell (there was a scene where Jones walks to a movie theater that shows Frank's dreams, and one of the posters, even though it was a nightmare, showed Frank's 12 year old daughter as a bride to his 50 year old friend)
Back in Action (2004) debacle, apparently development of the film was an absolute shitshow (edit to quote: in @Kari Kamiya 's account, the executives hated the film's director Joe Dante and sabotaged the screenplay whenever possible, the film could have been much funnier)
After that, Warner Bros Feature Animation went defunct.
I noticed this trend of sabotaging properties also happening when Disney ran the show.
John Carter (2012) is one of the most expensive films ever made, costing around $350 million dollars to make. The film, based on the Barsoom series by Edgar Rice Burroughs (author of Tarzan), was Pixar director Andrew Stanton's passion project and Stanton intended to create a trilogy. However, Disney CEO Bob Iger, who was already gooning to the idea of purchasing Lucasfilm and Star Wars, opposed any franchise that will compete with Star Wars. So what does Iger do? Iger sabotaged John Carter's marketing campaign so that the movie will definitely fail and lose the company hundreds of millions of dollars. Iger gave the film garbage official trailers and made the film look as disinteresting as possible so that people will not see it, and then blamed Stanton for the whole disaster. Compare.
Official trailer
Fan trailer
Another example of Iger destroying any competitor to Star Wars that Disney owns was Tron. Disney barely gave any consideration for a sequel to Tron: Legacy despite the movie's success, blaming the failure of Brad Bird's Tomorrowland that there was not a sequel. However, Tron and Tomorrowland are two extremely different properties, with Tron being already established as a franchise, so I did not understood the rationale of the neglect Tron suffered. Then I looked into Disney's TV series, Tron: Uprising, of which it is an enjoyable show with aesthetically pleasing animation. However, it only got one season before eventually cancelled. Why? Iger had the series be broadcasted on 12 AM on a weekday to make sure no kids will watch it so the series will definitely fail. Tron: Uprising came out during a time when Disney was in the process of buying out Lucasfilm, hence why they attempt to shut down any property that can compete with Star Wars. Now with Star Wars being a defiled corpse, Iger panicked and finally greenlit a sequel to Tron: Legacy, but apparently development of the sequel is a shitshow with many producers/directors leaving.
It is shocking how corporate executives in the movie and media business have this big of an ego problem that they will sabotage their own properties and lose the company hundreds of millions of dollars. Their job is to make sure all their properties are money-makers so that shareholders are pleased that the company has a stable future. But no, all the executives just want to find enemies to blame to the shareholders. It's so retarded.
It is shocking how corporate executives in the movie and media business have this big of an ego problem that they will sabotage their own properties and lose the company hundreds of millions of dollars. Their job is to make sure all their properties are money-makers so that shareholders are pleased that the company has a stable future. But no, all the executives just want to find enemies to blame to the shareholders. It's so retarded.
If they cant make 500%+ returns why even do anything?
Thats the mindset of execs behind these IPs. A Tron sequel would have made money but nothing like Avengers so in their mind zero point to make a Tron movie.
On the subject of shared universes, Universal thought they could ride the MCU's coattails with their IPs, first with Dracula Untold and then with the 2017 version of The Mummy .
Relying absolutely on CGI has been in general a terrible mistake. We should get more realistic props with all the technology we have now. You know it's bad when Cleopatra and Ben Hur look more realistic. CGI backgrounds feel fake after the first impression passes.
Re: DC vs Marvel, DC should have never tried to emulate Marvel. There is a market and an audience for a more "dark" and serious aspect of superheroes. Many critics were biased against this and their criticism wasn't about how good or bad the movies were but how they were not like the MCU. Some of us just don't want to see superheroes shouting jokes here and there during the main battle. Not even actual comic books do this.
I know this is probably a joke, but catering to morons from Twitter is the big mistake Hollywood and media in general makes. Check any normie doing reactions and they like movies that the "critics" and twitter "experts" destroy. If critics are retarded, twitter critics are worse.
Re: DC vs Marvel, DC should have never tried to emulate Marvel. There is a market and an audience for a more "dark" and serious aspect of superheroes. Many critics were biased against this and their criticism wasn't about how good or bad the movies were but how they were not like the MCU. Some of us just don't want to see superheroes shouting jokes here and there during the main battle. Not even actual comic books do this.
DCEU was always a schitzo behavior of either copying Marvel or going all edge and no point. Every time they had an especially bad critic reviews they just flipped the formula and then got blasted for either not being Marvel or unsuccessfully emulating Marvel. Nevermind dropping plot threads and characters due to internal politics.
They could have just done a 1 to 1 copy of any DCAU property and gotten a lot better results, but god forbid they didn't follow the DEEP LORE that Marvel pretended to have.
Brandon Lee's death was very much a consequence of people not realizing that blanks still eject shit, even if they aren't lead. It was a tragedy and prop masters learned a lot from it.
Baldwin, on the other hand, was just reckless, and his prop master was negligent.
Avi Arad: I think we learned that Venom is not a sideshow. In all fairness, I'll take the guilt because of what Sam Raimi used to say in all of these interviews feeling guilty that I forced him into it. And you know what I learned? Don't force anybody into anything. Therefore, (Sam) wasn't interested in the inside to make how is Venom like us? How do we deal with the Venom, and Marvel is all metaphors.
________________________________________________________________________
Another entry: Paramount's handling of Ralph Bakshi's Cool World. It was intended to be an erotic horror flick about a cartoonist who had sex with a sexy cartoon woman he created named Debbie Dallas and is now the father of a half-real, half-cartoon girl who considers herself a freak and goes on a rampage against the man who spawned her.
However, Frank Mancuso Jr., the producer, had spent most of the 80s producing in some form or another on almost all of the Friday the 13th movies that were made during that time, other horror flicks like April Fools' Day and Body Parts, as well as horror-themed shows like Friday's Curse, and The War Of The Worlds 1988, so he was understandably tired of doing horror films and wanted to do something different. He came up with a new concept to pitch around, hired new writers Michael Grais and Mark Victor (the duo who wrote Poltergeist with Spielberg - y'know, a horror movie) to make changes to the script, and hired Kim Basinger as the villain to give the movie some star power. Kim Basinger was also uninterested in doing a horror movie and was much more intrigued with the idea of doing a film that could be shown to sick children in hospitals and was put off by how adult the original script was, so this already mangled script was Frankenstiened even further to make it more "family-friendly".
It...didn't work. The movie was a major critical and financial dud, prompting Bakshi to stick to television animation for pretty much the rest of his days. It was one of five films in the early '90s (the others being The Marrying Man, Final Analysis, The Real McCoy, and The Getaway) that ended Kim Basinger's status as an A-list actress after a great stint in the '80s. The end result of Grais and Victor's rewrites - both the nature of the film itself and the fallout with the Writer's Guild over essentially scabbing - effectively obliterated their writing careers entirely (the next time they got a writing credit was on the 2015 remake of Poltergeist, and that was for their original script).
Can we bring up who's bright idea was it for the fact that Batman's and Superman's mom both share the same name to be used as a plot point in a DC movie?
Can we bring up who's bright idea was it for the fact that Batman's and Superman's mom both share the same name to be used as a plot point in a DC movie?
if it wasn't so hammy it might have worked. one of the rewrites i saw of that scene was for clark to just go "he's going to shoot/kill my parents" and Bruce hearing him out instead of sperging. have Clark bring up that his mom's name is Martha just as an aside . Just in general a patsy being used to distract Bruce had to have happened many times before, so for him to do that 180 wouldn't seem so off putting from his yelling beforehand, but then you wouldn't get that "epic" feel Snyder was going for. the flashback sucks too.
Oh and someone mentioned Bohemian Rhapsody? The clip from the opening (?) where they're at the cafe outside and they keep cutting every second with the damn camera.....no idea how they got it past editors and thought "Ah yes we'll use this take"
Adding to @Tasty Tatty, Doug Jones is one as well. Him and Andy Serkis really should be the only ones allowed to.
Disney killing hand drawn and 2D animation will forever be a crime and I have no idea how most people don't miss it and actually prefer that CGI slop. They're too busy draining their life force with unnecessary live action remakes.
Disney killing hand drawn and 2D animation will forever be a crime and I have no idea how most people don't miss it and actually prefer that CGI slop. They're too busy draining their life force with unnecessary live action remakes.
Considering 2D can be done on computers, it could come back cheaper. But Iger is a ginormous, greedy asshole who never understood Disney and still doesn't. Both Roy and Walt would never approve of him as CEO.
Fine. 
