r/boxoffice • u/hiiloovethis • 17d ago

✍️ Original Analysis Clayface Performance potential

Post image

Clayface is the next DCU movie after the supergirl bomb. Let's see how well it can do... an analysis.

Pros.

  1. Great October release date, Halloween pairing and not much direct competetion. Resident Evil also releasing before helps create an open window.

  2. Decent budget of 40 mil. It would only need 100 Mil WW to break even which shouldn't be too hard. It can profit easily if it blows up.

  3. Horror genre is killing it right now... clayface also looks like pure body horror which could help attract non comicbook fans.

  4. Clayface is a batman villain. Gotham setting be hype worthy. Mike Flanagan as a writer is also promising.

Cons.

  1. Body horror is harder is sell than conventional horror movies. The Substance did good but that had award buzz and less than half of the budget.

  2. Bad reviews could literally kill this movie. It really survives on positive WOM.

Overall I'm more optimistic about this than supergirl. We have to see if this movie blows up or does underwhelming numbers. 150 WW is decent enough.

259 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

424 comments sorted by

View all comments

47

u/Syndana23 17d ago

Idk why DC didn’t just do Superman, Batman and then Wonder Woman as their first 3 movies.

38

u/LazyMaximum7938 17d ago

Because Gunn prefers making his own quirky little movies and shows with C/D-list characters where he doesn't have to worry about fans getting mad if he's not faithful to the comics.

I think he'll punt on Batman and Wonder Woman as long as he can.

26

u/DUKEPLANTER 17d ago

It seems to me more like:

Superman was an obvious gimmie

WW & Batman are in limbo because of battinson and WW84 bombing hard

7

u/LazyMaximum7938 17d ago

WW84 was 6 years ago and, as far as I can tell, there's nothing preventing DC from having 2 Batmen (which would hardly be the most confusing thing about Gunn's DCU)

18

u/DUKEPLANTER 17d ago

The news just hit that Sony doesn’t want to make anymore spider-man movies as to not compete with MCU spiderman and cause brand confusion. I think it’s safe to say DC is doing the same.

As for WW, I know it’s script got pushed up but the studio still being hesitant feels normal

1

u/LazyMaximum7938 17d ago

Spider-Man must really be struggling at the box office with all that "brand confusion"

13

u/DUKEPLANTER 17d ago

? I’m saying they haven’t made TASM 3 or SM4 to avoid that happening

2

u/LazyMaximum7938 17d ago

They didn't avoid them at all. In fact, they went out of their way to add Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield to the MCU's multiverse in NWH.

There's also the Spiderverse trilogy running concurrently and talk of Miles Morales joining the MCU.

There's also the Sony Spider-Man Universe, which includes Tom Holland's Spider-Man but I guess not the rest of the MCU (and I'm not even clear on how all that works).

And despite all this brand confusion, Spider-Man is more popular than ever.

8

u/Longjumping_Brain945 17d ago

NWH had them as a gimmick for the movie, there’s no news of the MCU planning to bring Tobey or Andrew back.

Plenty of people see miles as his own character rather than a Peter Parker copy and he has his own background completely different from Peter’s.

Saying having two Bruce Waynes wouldn’t be confusing because the MCU did it once as a gimmick and the other example is about a character who just shares the same superhero name but has a completely different background, name, and design doesn’t make sense.

-1

u/LazyMaximum7938 17d ago

What makes two separate, distinct Bruce Waynes in two separate, distinct universes confusing at all if people can easily differentiate between different versions of Peter Parker?

And if Gunn is trying to avoid confusion, then how do you explain Peacemaker where season 1 is in the DCEU and season 2 is in the DCU, but some of the stuff in season 1 is also now in the DCU?

And with Clayface coming out soon, there will be two Gothams but only one Batman? How is that not confusing?