Wednesday Comics: Predator vs. Wolverine

 

I am a man of simple tastes.  I don't need every comic story to be Watchmen or Doomsday Clock.  

Sometimes I just want to see some bloody mayhem.

And that is what I got with Predator vs. Wolverine.

While it comes with a hefty price tag for a floppy ($7.99), it was much more entertaining that most of the comics I have read lately.  Also, at 48 pages it gives you your money's worth.

The story begins with a horribly beaten Wolverine being chased by a Predator.  Logan is definitely on the ropes and it looks like he could be outmatched.  We then spend most of the time in a flashback to 1900 Alaska.  A young Logan is eking out an existence of the harsh wilderness.  In the meantime, a Predator makes his way to the same territory for some hunting.  There are some great shots of the Predator going after some of the while life, including an orca.  

But sure enough, Logan finds himself on a collision course with this being and the two are more evenly matched than they realized, causing some brutal carnage along the way.

I enjoyed the simplicity of this story.  Writer Benjamin Percy is not trying to do anything too pretentious.  There are moments where Logan pontificates on the encroaching settlers and their "civilization."  But this does not detract from the intensity of the story.  The main artist for this issue is Greg Land and he does an excellent job of giving us a harrowing setting for this battle in the snow.  Mixed up in the elements, the landscape only serves to emphasize the brutality the way the jungle did in the original movie.  Watching Logan and the Predator claw at each other felt like some wonderful fan-fiction match up in the best possible sense.  You can feel the visceral thrill of the wild slashing of their claws and blades.

Percy knows not to linger too much.  He also understands one of the key ideas in a Predator story is that you not only have to be strong, but ultimately you have to outwit the Predator.  If you don't there will be consequences.  

Again, this isn't anything terribly ground-breaking, but I have still been thinking about the story for the last few days.  I thought this was a one-shot, but the book ends on a cliff-hanger which teases an even better story in the next issue.

And I will definitely be picking that one up.

Trailer Time: One Life

I happen to know the story behind this movie and I am so happy that they have finally turned it into a film.

One Life is the story of Sir Nicholas Winton.  Right before the German occupation of Czecolavaki, Winton organized a gigantic effort to relocate hundreds of Jewish children as refugees to escape the holocoast.  The story seems to be told in flashback, as Winton spent most of his years with his amazingly heroic efforts going unrecognized.

Not only does this movie look as though it will inspiring and harrowing, I love the dilogue I heard.  There is a part where someone says to a younger Winton that he has a lot of faith in the common man.  His response is, "I am a common man."  This hit me very hard because of how the film seems to be promoting this noble idea: the common man is capable of uncommon heroism.

Thoughts?

Film Review: A Haunting in Venice

 

Readers of this blog will know that I am a great fan of Kenneth Branagh, both as an actor and director.  Yes, he can do truly horrible work (e.g. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein), but most of his movies are delightful.  

I have especially enjoyed his Poirot series of mysteries, bringing the Agatha Christi hero to life.  Having not read her books, each movie is a delightful whodunit.  The first, Murder on the Orient Express was a fantastic guessing game until the end.  Death on the Nile had a lot more flaws and felt a lot more artificial, but it was still enjoyable.  

This brings us to his third entry: A Haunting in Venice.

Poirot (Branagh) has become a kind of hermit living in Venice.  He is weary of the world and its darkness, having looked into the minds of murderers for too long.  Because of his celebrity, people keep pestering him for help, but they are kept at arms length by his bodyguard Vitale (Riccardo Scamarcio).  But one day, an old friend named Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey) comes calling.  She is an old friend of Poirot's and is a famous mystery writer.  She appeals to their friendship for her help: she wants to debunk a psychic named Reynolds (Michelle Yeoh), but she hasn't been able to find her trick.  She begs Poirot to come to a seance on Halloween night and spot the fake at a house that is said to be haunted.

Our hero agrees.  At the home we have a mix of colorful characters:

-Rowena Drake (Kelly Reilly): the owner of the home who calls for the seance to contact her deceased daughter

-Dr. Leslie Ferrier (Jamie Dornan): a doctor with severe PTSD who was personal physician to Rowena's daughter.

-Olga Seminoff (Camille Cottin): the devoutly Catholic maid to Rowena.

-Leopold Ferrier (Jude Hill): Leslie's young son who is precocious and serious about the ghosts in the house.

-Max Gerard (Kyle Allen): Rowena's former chef and former fiancé to her deceased daughter.

The story begins as a curious bit of sleuthing as Poirot confronts Reynolds as a fake, but she calmly professes her powers.  However, things take a turn when there is a murder.  Poirot locks everyone into the house and uses every ounce of his deductive power to find the killer, even when he sees and hears things he knows cannot be real.

As a murder mystery, the story is a great deal of fun.  I always think that a good detective story is one where the clues are laid out, but not obvious.  If you really work at it, you can figure out the killer.  It should be too easy or too impossible.  A Haunting in Venice, skirts just the right line.  I remember I picked up on a big clue early on, but I couldn't figure out what it meant.  As the story began to unfold, the pieces fell into place.

What separates this movie from the previous two is the Branagh films this much more like a classic horror movie than an Agatha Christi mystery.  Jumps scares abound through the film.  The constant looming shadows and creepy corners give the movie a wonderfully claustrophobic feeling that injects something fresh into the series.  Also, his last Poirot movie, Death on the Nile, was hindered by an abundance of CGI.  In this movie, Venice feels very tangible, like you stepped out of a time machine and the city is displayed in all of its beauty and horror.

Branagh loves pulling together an eclectic cast for his movies and he tends to get excellent performances.  As Poirot, Branagh is once again fantastic.  He shows us how the detective is worn down by the world and how his powers of deduction can almost be a hindrance.  His constant exposure to lies and untruth have robbed him of his faith in God and humanity.

I think Tina Fey was born a few decades too late.  I recognize her talent, but I'm generally not a fan of hers.  But she is pitch perfect for the post-WWII era "His Girl Friday" type roll.  Dornan does a good job portraying the haunted look of a someone who witnessed the atrocities of war.  Hill is wonderfully endearing and creepy, portraying both childlike devotion and inscrutability.  Cottin's Olga could have been a one-note religious fanatic, but her fervor comes from a place of real humanity.  Even the foppish Allen brings dimension to his character.  Both Reilly and Yeoh play their parts well.  And there is something percolating under Scarmarcio's calm demeanor.  All of this leads to a cauldron of tension that boils over.

An added grace of the movie is that it explores the mystery of spirits and the afterlife.  Every one of the characters comes at the question from a different angle and so you get some wonderfully contrary perspectives that push the personalities and conflicts forward.  The movie isn't about "mystery," its about "Mystery."  This has to be deftly handled and not too heavy-handed.  Branagh does a good job with the balance, letting every character have their say and letting the audience decide for themselves who is in the right.  But this also makes the movie not just a hunt for a killer, but a question of Poirot's soul: will he find faith again?

Bottom line, if you enjoyed the last two entries in this series, you will enjoy A Haunting in Venice.  It is better than the last film and is a satisfying thriller.

New Evangelizers Post: You Cannot Vote For Evil

                                                      

 

I have a new article up at NewEvangelizers.com.  

I haven’t written in the past about Catholic morality and voting.

Because candidates and political parties are not perfect, you are morally permitted to vote for someone who may not uphold Catholic morals well. For example, if one candidate supports abortion but the other candidate supports the use of torture, bot candidates support intrinsic evil. You are permitted to vote for one over the other if you believe the greater evil will be avoided. However, there is a very important condition placed on this:

You cannot vote FOR the evil.

Let me put it another way. I’ve spoken with Catholics who vote for pro-abortion candidates for public office. Sometimes they say to me that the reason for the vote is that the overall greater good will be achieved. This person may believe that creating a more stable economy (for example) would lead to an overall decrease in abortions. While I find this thinking flawed, there is moral elbow-room in Catholic teaching for this way of thinking. A person may vote this way and still not incur sin upon themselves.

However, if the Catholic says, “I am voting for this candidate because he or she is pro-abortion,” then this is a different case.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of faith made this point very clear:

It must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a
political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and
morals. The Christian faith is an integral unity, and thus it is incoherent to isolate some
particular element to the detriment of the whole of Catholic doctrine. A political commitment
to a single isolated aspect of the Church’s social doctrine does not exhaust one’s responsibility
toward the common good.(Doctrinal Note on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of
Catholics in Political Life,no.4)

In other words, while you can vote for flawed candidates in spite of their flaws, you cannot vote for them because of those flaws.

If you vote for a candidate because they promote a moral evil like abortion, then you incur sin upon yourself.

This goes beyond the candidates and goes towards direct voting. In my home state, we are preparing to vote on a constitutional amendment that would enshrine abortion as a fundamental right. This would make the killing of the unborn legal at all stages of development without restriction.

Every Catholic is obligated to not vote for this in our state. If a Catholic were to vote for this amendment, then they would be incurring sin.

If the law was a way to mitigate an already existing evil, it would be morally permissible. For example, if abortion was already fully legal for any reason and a proposed amendment would make it legal only in the first trimester, then this would be morally acceptable to choose. The reason is that while abortion in the first trimester is still evil, this amendment would be a first step away from the greater evil into the greater good.

You can read the whole article here.

Film Flash: A Haunting in Venice

  

 

15 words or less film review (full review to follow soon)

Branagh once again gives an entertaining, classic mystery filmed like an old school horror movie 

Trailer Time: Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom

I know that Warner Bros. has essentially given up on this movie.  And since their last to big-budget movies did not do so well, I can almost understand why.

But I kind of dig this trailer.  I liked the first Aquaman and I like that this movie is moving further with the complicated relationship that Arthur has with his brother.  I also like that Black Manta is now front and center.  I am very nervous if they are going to follow the comic story regarding Arthur's son.  It would be a good story, but it would be devastating.  

All I want from this movie is a fun adventure.  And Jason Momoa can still deliver.  

Thoughts?

9/11 - 22 Years Ago Today

    

22 years ago today.

I have no words to describe the horror of that day.  

Today is about the 3,042 people who were horribly and viciously murdered by wicked men.

The best thing to do today would be to remember the dead.

Here is a link to the names of the murdered.  In your charity, perhaps look at the names and pray for a few of them by name.

Let us never forget.

Never.

Sunday Best: Fall/Winter Movies 2023

 Now that the Summer movie season has ended, it is time to look ahead to Fall and Winter.

This year has been very unusual for movies because of the actors and writers striking.  Most of the big blockbusters were finished before the actors strike so that they could go and promote them.  But now, movies like Dune Part II have been delayed.  And this is not because the movie isn't finished, it is because the Actors Guild won't let the stars promote the movie, including doing red carpet premieres.   

Here is a list, with a few brief thoughts of my own, including on a scale of 1-5 stars my likelihood of seeing it in theaters (1 being “Not at all” 5 being “Cannot wait!”).

SEPTEMBER

September 15th

A Haunting in Venice

I am huge Kenneth Branagh fan and I have greatly enjoyed his last two outings as Poirot.  I like that this movie seems like a stylistic change from the previous ones in order breathe some fresh life into it. (****)

September 22nd

Expendables 4

While I enjoyed the first two, I have no real interest in seeing a fourth one (**)

Dumb Money

I actually think that this could be incredibly intersting and funny.  I remember reading about this story when it originally happened.  But since I'm not a finance guy, I couldn't follow it as well, yet I found it very intriguing.  (****)

September 29th

The Creator

I feel like I should be more interested in this one.  But I don't see anything terribly original that I haven't seen in other sci-fi stories with the same topic.  Maybe I'm wrong (**)

Kill Room

I think the premise is interesting: a hitman sells paintings as a way to launder his illegal money.  The problem is that his paintings actually become successful.  It could be good, but I might wait until streaming (***)

Saw X

No thank you (*)

OCTOBER

October 6th

The Burial

I like the cast and I enjoy legal dramas, but I haven't seen anthing to really hook me yet (**)

The Exorcist: Believer

I really don't like horror movies anymore, so I will be avoiding this one (*)

Kraven the Hunter

In Sony's attempt to create a Venom-verse, they have completely re-imagined Kraven's origin.  Part of what made him so terrifying was that he was just a man who was lethal enough to take on super heroes.  It could be decent, but I'm getting serious Morbious vibes.  But is directed by JC Chandor who made a good movie (Triple Frontier) and a great movie (All is Lost), so I'm not sure.  (**)

Freelance

John Cena is looking to at trying to recreate the same formula that made The Lost City a moderate hit.  This could be okay, but I may wait for streaming for this one too. (**)

The Marsh King's Daughter

This reminds me of the trailer to Where the Crawdads Sing.  That movie was a decent hit, but I wasn't interested. (**)

October 13th

What Happens Later

This could be a nice throwback to the Rom-Coms of the '90s.  I like the cast and the trailer was charming enough to make me interested in seeing it (***)

Ordinary Angels

Every once in a while, you need a simple feel-good movie to restore your faith in humanity.  This looks like this could be one of those pleasant, uplifting movies.  (***)

October 20th

Killers of the Flower Moon

Although I have enjoyed later Scorsese more than early Scorsese, something about this movie looks overly indulgent like The Irishman.  I might give this a chance if the reviews are good (***)

October 27th

Five Nights at Freddy's

Even though I don't like horror movies, there is something a bit mesermizing about this movie.  Maybe it's because it taps into the unspoken horror children experience at the old Chuck E. Cheese restaurants, but there is a small chance I will go see this (**)

NOVEMBER

November 10th

Journey to Bethlehem

I need to see more, but a musical version of the Christmas Story might be a fun family experience (or it could be terrible like most Christian movies are) (***)

The Marvels

I know that there is already a lot of online hate for this film before it even comes out, but I am willing to give it a chance.  I didn't hate Captain Marvel or Ms. Marvel, so I'm expecting this movie to be at least mid-level decent (***)

The Holdovers

I would be much more interested in this movie if it wasn't directed by the dour Alexander Paine.  A recurring theme for him is that people are awful and people don't change.  If he wants to tell those kind of stories, more power to him.  But I don't feel like paying to watch them (*)

Next Goal Wins

I like underdog sports movies, but I am kind of sour on the overrated Taika Waititi.  This could be fun, but I have a suspicion that the movie will think that it is funnier than it actually is and it will sprinkled with a healthy dose of lecturing (**)

Trolls Band Together Movie

I haven't seen any of these and I won't start with this one (*)

The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes

Who thought this was a good idea.  I really don't care how the Hunger Games started, nor do I want to see the fall of Snow in an Anakin Skywalker-style prequel.  There is nothing about this that is appealing to me. (*)

November 22nd

Wish

I need to see more of this in the previews before I make up my mind, but Disney animation has not been doing it for me for a while (*)

Napoleon

Oh my goodness... I don't know what it is about this movie that has me super-exited.  I have to hand it to Ridley Scott: he has not let age slow him down.  The drama and scope of this movie look incredible.  I hope it lives up to the hype in my head (*****)

DECEMBER

December 1st

The Bikeriders

I never understood motorcycle culture and Tom Hardy's weird vocal choice has me scratching my head (*)

Godzilla Minus One

I have friends who are gigantic Godzilla devotees.  I am not one of those, but there is something about this movie that feels more accessible to those who are not steeped in the culture of Godzilla.  I might check this one out with some friends (****)

December 15th

Wonka

While I'm not crazy about another prequel that wasn't needed, there are moments in the trailer that seemed rather delightful.  I'm not saying this is going to be good, but the preview wasn't a disaster so I will keep my eyes open for this (***)

December 15

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom

I enjoyed the first one as a fun superhero romp.  I think this one won't be as good and I get the feeling that Warner Bros. probably over-produced it, but I will be there (*****)

Migration

Looks like a generic animated family film with no real humor or depth (*)

Ferrari

I just can't seem to bring myself to care about this story.  Maybe I need to be a car guy, but it doesn't interest me (*)

The Color Purple

The original Spielberg movie is one of the only films of his that I hate.  It is long, ugly, dreary, and labored.  I have not heard the music from this musical remake, so it may be very much improved.  But I don't have my hopes up (*)

Thoughts?

Defending Life in Ohio

 I usually try to avoid anything resembling politics in this blog.  My main reason being that politics can be divisive in a way like no other.  My goal is to bring people together in engaging with theology, philosophy and pop culture.

There are, however, some things that transcend politics.  As Catholics, we are obliged to stand with the defenseless unborn and work against the way they are murdered in the womb through abortion.

As I've written, the overturning of Roe v. Wade was not the end of the war over abortion, but only the beginning.  Yes, it is true that striking down that decision was an important step in securing the fundamental right to life.  But now, each state must vote on what abortion laws it will have.

Unfortunately, I believe that many pro-life people have become complacent, thinking that victory has already been achieved.  On the flip side, many pro-abortion people are energized and engaged in taking away the right life for the unborn.  I predict that the pro-life side will have many defeats in the near future until they are roused into action by these losses.

Part of the struggle is learning how to cope with that defeat and move forward.  While I am not fatalistic about the upcoming battles, I have reason to be pessimistic.  However, I always have hope that good people will join together to protect the helpless.  With that in mind, I continue to fight.

I live in the state of Ohio.  This coming November, we will be voting on a constitutional amendment that will legalize abortion up until birth.  Not only this, but it will make it so that anyone, even minors, will be able to get an abortion without parental consent.

The Catholic Conference of Ohio is the official voice for the Catholic Church in this state.  If you live in Ohio, I would ask you to visit their webpage on this issue:

https://www.ohiocathconf.org/protect-ohio

For a more succinct breakdown of what the proposed amendment will legalize, you can check out this .pdf:

https://www.ohiocathconf.org/Portals/1/Protect%20Them%20Both/Campaign%20Materials/Where%20Does%20It%20Say%20That_English.pdf?ver=CIaF77pI9tvhzPUOytEcJg%3d%3d

If you are not from Ohio, I would still ask that you share this information on social media if you have friends who live here.  

I would also ask that we commit ourselves to prayer and fasting for this vote.  We can do nothing without the help of Almighty God.  If we commit ourselves to Him, maybe our state won't commit this grave sin.

God Bless.

New Evangelizers Post: Q and the Synoptic Problem

                                                     

 

I have a new article up at NewEvangelizers.com.  

For today’s article, I thought we would look at some modern Biblical Theory regarding the Gospels. While you may find greater spiritual profit in praying with the Scriptures, it is helpful to understand the modern methodologies so that you are better armed against attacks on the faith from some “Biblical Scholars.”

The Synoptic Gospels are Matthew, Mark, and Luke. They are called this because they are incredibly similar in form and content (“synops” means “from the same eye). This leads to what is commonly called “The Synoptic Problem:” Why are these Gospels so similar? What accounts for why they are so much alike? But what also accounts for their differences. We have stories that are found in all three. But we also have stories that are unique to each Gospel. And we have stories that are found only in two of them, but not the third.

I want to be clear up front that we are entering the realm of theory. What we are about to go over is not a matter of doctrine or dogma. The following are the most popular theoretical explanations to account for the evidence.

The most popular theory as to why they are so similar is called “The Two Source Theory.” The theory goes as such:

1. Mark is the first Gospel that is written. Most Bible scholars believe that the first person to ever write down a Gospel was Mark. This includes not only the four canonical Gospels, but any of the Gospels that did not make it into the Bible. One of the reasons why they think this is that Mark is the shortest of the Synoptics. The rule of the thumb is that the earlier drafts are shorter, but the later ones add more detail and complexity. To be sure, this is not an absolute rule. William Shakespeare wrote centuries before Stephen King, but the Bard’s body of work is much more technical and complex.

2. A number of Jesus’ teaching are collected in something called the “Q Source.” The theory goes that at the same time Mark’s Gospel is being passed around, there is also a loose collection of Jesus saying, teachings, and actions. This rough collection of Jesus information is called by scholars the Q Source, because it is an unknown quotient. A big mistake some people make is thinking that we have some copies of the Q Source. We do not. It is a theoretical construct. Why do they theorize Q? Because of the next part of the theory.

3. Matthew and Luke draw from Mark and Q. Years after Mark writes his Gospel, Matthew decides to write one as well. Completely independent of Matthew, Luke in another part of the world also decides to write a Gospel. Both Matthew and Luke (according to the Two-Source Theory) have a copy of Mark, from which each evangelist takes stories. This is why you find stories that are similar in Matthew, Mark, and Luke: because Matthew and Luke took them from Mark. These would be stories like Jesus healing Peter’s Mother-in-Law or the disciples picking wheat on the Sabbath.

But there are some stories that are found in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark. Where did these stories come from? According to the theory, Matthew and Luke also have access to Q. This explains why there are stories found in those Gospels and not in Mark: because Matthew and Luke took them from the Q Source. Again, I want to emphasize that we do not have an actual, physical Q document. It is completely theoretical, but it is accepted by many as the best explanation to the problem. These stories would be like the three specific temptations Satan gave Jesus in the desert or the Beatitudes.

4. Matthew and Luke draw from their own unique sources. There are stories that are found only in Matthew that are not found in any other Gospel. The theory says that he has a unique source: the M Source. This is a source that neither Mark nor Luke have access to, which is why these stories are only in Matthew. These would be like the Parable of the Fishing Net or Jesus giving Peter the Keys to the Kingdom. Luke also has his own unique source: The L Source. This is a source that neither Matthew nor Mark have access to, which is why these stories are only in Luke. These would be like Jesus’ rejection at Nazareth or the Parable of the Prodigal Son.

Now that we have the Two Source Theory established, you can talk about it from a place of knowledge. Some things to be on the watch for:

You can read the whole article here.

Sunday Best: Summer Box Office Review 2023

 Michael Crichton once said that no one can actually predict a movie's box office, even though studios pay millions of dollars for people to do exactly that.  In the end, there is always an X-Factor that cannot be seen in advance.

And this is especially true for me predicting this past summer's box office.  

In terms of box office success, the numbers were much better than last year.  In the Summer of 2021, no movie made over $200 million domestic.  Last year, half of the Top 10 made over $300 million domestic.  Rounding up, the top 6 biggest hits made that much.

Below are my predictions along with the actual box office numbers:

MY PREDICTION	ACTUAL BOX OFFICE
Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part 1	Barbie
The Flash	Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse	Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny	Oppenheimer
Fast X	Little Mermaid
Elemental	Sound of Freedom
Transformers: Rise of the Beasts	Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny
Little Mermaid	Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part 1
Oppenheimer	Transformers: Rise of the Beasts
Blue Beetle	Elemental

So as you can see, I was way off this year.  

-Barbie  was the highest grossing movie of the summer by over $200 million and I did not even have it in the Top Ten

-I predicted 7 out of the Top Ten.  

-I did not correctly predict any of the movies in their proper spots

-I stupidly forgot to add Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3 to my list.  This was an oversight, but it threw off my entire grid.

So here are my conclusions.

WINNERS

1. Original Movies

4 of the Top 10 movies, including the number 1, were movies that were not sequels or part of an existing franchise (Barbie, Oppenheimer, Sound of Freedom, Elemental).  I can't recall a time in recent memory when this happened.  

2. Angel Studios

Even though the movie was made a few years ago but Fox, it was shelved by Disney until Angel Studios purchased it.  The budget for the movie was a little less than $15 million, so I imagine that is around what they paid.  As of now, the domestic box office is $181 million.  It is unbelievable that this movie outgrossed and Indiana Jones film.

3.  Grass Roots and Organic Marketing

Speaking of Sound of Freedom, this movie became such a big hit because it did a grass roots appeal to the underserved market of audience members.  With that, the made the movie an act of support against child trafficking.

This summer also saw the "Barbenheimer" phenomenon.  People online saw that Barbie and Oppenheimer  were being released on the same day.  The juxtaposition of these two tonal opposite films led to a lot of viral humor online, but also a great deal of interest.  I can attest to the packed theaters during the entire week these movies premiered.  This was something that no studio marketing department could have created and it shows the power of that a real cultural meme can have in the real world.

LOSERS

1.  Franchises

The power of the franchise may be waning.  A movie like Captain Marvel could make a world-wide box office of $1 billion on the strength of its connection to the Marvel franchise.  But franchises, especially the older ones, are underperforming.  While Guardians was in the top 3, it did less than many were expecting.  Mission: Impossible, did not do nearly as well as I was predicting.  Fast X did not even make it into the Top 10.  

2.  DC

DC released two movies this summer and they were both spectacular flops.  I took a big chance on nostalgia carrying The Flash to 2nd place.  But the movie (which I actually liked and saw twice in the theater) barely made $100 million domestic.  Blue Beetle (which I also liked), was supposed to be the first film in the new DCU (although I think this was just something that James Gunn was saying in case it was a hit).  But that film is hovering at less than half of The Flash's box office.  We still have the Aquaman movie coming up, but I cannot predict how that will go.  I think Gunn has his work cut out for him in bringing the hype for Superman Legacy.  I can already predict that if incorporates The Authority in the movie in a significant way, he will sink the box office.

----

An observation also is the gap between the top 5 and the bottom 5.  Take a look at these numbers from Boxofficemojo.com

ACTUAL BOX OFFICE
Barbie	$601,384,254
Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse	$381,210,457
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3	$358,995,815
Oppenheimer	$304,351,000
Little Mermaid	$298,056,761
Sound of Freedom	$181,084,909
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny	$174,221,747
Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part 1	$169,177,466
Transformers: Rise of the Beasts	$157,066,392
Elemental	$151,991,994

There is a nearly $100 million gap between #5 and #6.

The total revenue for the top 5 is $1.6 billion.  The total revenue for the bottom 5 is $833 million.  So you can see that the top half made 2 times as much as the bottom half.  Fortunately, this all of the movies made at least $150 million.  Last year, only the top 5 made at least that much each.  

Thoughts?