Peter A. Berry, @XXL, @COMPLEX, @Stereogum, @Variety, @Okayplayer, @Andscape, @Bloomberg.etc. https://xitter.cf/t.co/mrzSkIq0qb https://xitter.cf/t.co/90XfAufnuK
Joined May 2011
- Tweets93.4K
- Following1.1K
- Followers1.7K
- Likes66.5K
Peter retweeted
I don’t think you really get to scoff at a $600M box office after running Paramount
One of the reasons Skydance replaced James Gunn and Peter Safran as the heads of DC Studios had to do with box office.
• ‘Supergirl’ was a massive bomb this year.
• ‘Superman’s $618M box office was not impressive to Skydance either, as the film lacked “pop culture impact” in their eyes.
(Source: hollywoodreporter.com/movies…)
one more thing I'll say: we shouldn't be fighting each other media folks. We're all getting largely shafted by the system. We're going to have to build our own interconnected systems very soon. And in fact, some of us already kinda have. And it will continue.
1
3
122
it can feel like such an outcome-determined world. when someone's single, when they're broke and without a job, everyone has the right answer about why that person doesn't have something, and their authority simply comes from them having it lol
1
3
180
I mean this is just taking everything they say at face value
Well, this is going to make some James Gunn fans VERY uncomfortable.
The Hollywood Reporter has published a detailed breakdown of Gunn and Peter Safran's removal from DC Studios, and it confirms something I've been arguing for a while. SUPERMAN (2025), despite being profitable, apparently DID NOT meet Skydance's financial expectations.
Remember that reported $100 million profit everyone kept throwing around as proof the DCU was doing great? Well, according to THR, David Ellison's team wasn't particularly impressed. The movie earned $618 million worldwide, less than MAN OF STEEL did back in 2013, and reportedly failed to deliver the financial return or pop culture impact Skydance expected.
And then you have SUPERGIRL, which was an outright disaster, followed by CLAYFACE, which THR describes as a modest success. So we're three movies into the DCU, and the new owners apparently aren't happy with the results.
What's particularly interesting is that Ted Sarandos raised a similar concern during his Senate testimony back in February. He pointed to SUPERMAN's shortened theatrical window while discussing how underperforming movies often move to digital earlier. People pushed back HARD on that interpretation at the time, but this new reporting certainly makes his comments worth revisiting.
And here's what's funny. This is essentially the same criticism MAN OF STEEL and BATMAN V SUPERMAN faced years ago. They made money, but didn't meet the expectations Warner Bros. had for them. Now we're hearing something remarkably similar about Gunn's SUPERMAN.
I enjoyed SUPERMAN, but I've never believed that profitability alone proved the DCU was succeeding. Now Gunn and Safran are out, Skydance is bringing in new leadership, and the entire direction of the franchise is once again up in the air.
DC is in a much more complicated position than some fans have been willing to acknowledge.
2
81
Tbh I just don’t know how people thought we were just going to immediately reboot flash and Wonder Woman. Like everything was going at a solid pace. The Batman. Sequel still isn’t even out. And now they’re starting over again
62
Peter retweeted
I wrote about how I will miss James Gunn’s weird DCU thehardpass.net/i-will-miss-…
Peter retweeted
Putting PR folks on blast is unnecessary. They have a tough job, too. (Given how things are going, someday it might be your job.)
It is on us to establish filters for the noise.
One way to do this: Offer guidance on pitching: thedesk.net/about-us/pitch/
