Board Thread:Movies/@comment-3048593-20171206004220/@comment-3048593-20180220072624

Gemnist 2.0 wrote: KalKent wrote: Which on DC's side, makes me curious as to how both 'Aquaman' and 'Shazam' turns out.

In terms of critical reviews, I'm actually kinda optimistic. Mainly because, for the former, James Wan's films have been increasingly better-received as time has gone on, and for the latter, they seem to be going for that MCU director-choosing vibe of "this guy doesn't do this kind of movie, but he's with us on the vision so let's do it". Financially, Aquaman should do fairly well, but I think Shazam might struggle a bit more just because he's no longer the world's most popular superhero - or even a popular one in general, which has been the case for decades (sure, Guardians was in a similar position, but by then the Marvel brand was too recognizable - it was a risk for them then, it isn't any longer). In terms of how the movie turns out, I think both are on the same level. 'Aquamna' in maybe in how 'Justice League' turned out, though of course that didn't seem to hinder 'Wonder Woman' in how 'BvS' turned out.

I personally have more faith in 'Shazam' because it seems to be starting on a clean slate, with it having essentially no established connection to anything Justice League (although with Shazam's powers, it may still be connected to the Greek pantheon of gods established in both 'Wonder Woman' and 'Justice League'). So it doesn't have the taint associated with it (other than being DCEU), and creatively not chained down. Though it may end up being a case like 'Doctor Strange', where it's for the most part stand-alone, but still references to things already established in the world, while not having the plot rely on anything heavily.