Has there been a more pathetic failed attempt at a cinematic universe?

fembusters universe

*AHEM*
league of extraordinary gentlemen

...

They are still going on, now with Blumhouse. They were trying to do it since Van Helsing, few years before cinematic universe craze.

Hellboy reboot will be a massive flop. Tracking for 17M opening weekend.

youtu.be/hCm2PX5Iz00

That’s the new Dark Universe.

This is the old Dark Universe we’re talking about, the one that was an epic fail.

>*AHEM*
same universe

You know the really funny part about this?
Universal doesn’t actually own the rights to most of these.

Even the Creature of the Black Lagoon has showed up in a bunch of non-Universal movies

Well yeah they're all based on 19th century public domain novels.

Saddest thing is everyone could have told them it would fail before it even got started. It was a cynical attempt to cash in on the capeshit universe nonsense. Except it's not really capeshit. So obviously it wasn't going to work.

You know what’s funnier?

The old Universal Monster movies actually invented the concept of a shared movie universe

The movie itself is okay but not to start with. It's like MCU jumping straight to Winter Soldier without previous films. Shame because you can see that they put a lot of work into it. Stunts and sets instead of lazy CGI, new designs (twin eyes are fucking creepy) and lore. Someone had hope and vision.

Actually, you know what’s even more funny than that?

Their website is still up.

darkuniverse.com/

Both websites. welcometoprodigium is also up.

Yes, their website is still up, and it’s barebones as fuck.

And the Prodgium site is just a video loop.

That’s not a good viral website.
This is:
masraniglobal.com/index.html

Arrhggg. We will never get adventure horror flicks. First Van Helsing, then Dracula Untold and now Mummy. Pleb gobbling all kinds of capeshit all the fucking time but for some reason they couldn't save similar monster movies. Fuck this.

brendanfraser.com/

>Brendan’s site has more content

Attached: 40C9447D-84AE-4515-946C-CB7C6A4ADF95.png (1136x640, 649K)

It’s not confirmed the Dark Universe is dead.

I think they will still use that name. They had issues with WB and to get along. They will just focus more on standalone movies instead of 1 continuous story.
Plus the logo is pretty cool, the dark side of Universal's planet Earth makes sense for these.

>They had issues with WB and to get along.
What?

I remember something about WB having priority on the name for the DCEU version of justice league dark when del toro was going to direct it

Please elaborate more

"and" is a typo. I was thinking of different sentence while typing this. Should be: "issues to get along"

IT worked for the ‘Penny Dreadful’ show on Cable.
‘Jeckyll and Hyde’ was another TV show that tried something similar.
Both got killed off for extra seasons shortly before the Mummy remake and Dark Universe were scheduled to come out.
The problem, was that Iniversal should have done ndividual movies featuring the characters, with less crossover exempt buried easter eggs and references, till several movies lines were setup, and then started with the crossovers.
Either that, or the first movie should have been an introduction to a bunch of the different story lines all at once.

>The problem, was that Iniversal should have done ndividual movies featuring the characters

>Dracula Untold comes out
>Fuck yes, monster universe
>Movie is meh, but the aspect of Charles Dance's characters setting up for Dracula vs. spooky scaries is intriguing enough
>They cancel it before it gets off the ground
>Mummy remake
>Oh shit!
>Tom Cruise, no JUST, embarrassing IMAX trailer
>Hoo boy, we're off to a shit start but let's settle in and see how bad it gets
>Movie is once again meh but there's lots of potential with the Jekyll/Hyde situation and a nebulous story of tortured heroes trying to stamp out primal forces of evil is established
>Feels like a perfect lead-in to Frankenstein's Monster, keeps the option open for re-integrating Dracula Untold or retconning all of it without seeming hamfisted, no idea what they were planning to do about Cruise but at this point the mummy is an accessory to Jekyll's story anyways
>Cancelled AGAIN

If this shit ever gets off the ground (it won't) it'll be off of a blockbuster memetastic CGI MCUclone shitfest action movie with no potential to really build off of itself because they can't fucking commit to an invested story that needs a little bit of setup and might start out rough.

>The problem, was that Iniversal should have done ndividual movies featuring the characters, with less crossover exempt buried easter eggs and references, till several movies lines were setup, and then started with the crossovers.
This. The Mummy would work as 3rd or so movie in the series, even without changes. It just feels off as the 1st entry. It's the opposite to style over substance.

What would your first two be?

>Dracula Untold comes out
I-I liked the Wolfman
youtube.com/watch?v=5JB1NY2xut8

>CGI
CGI is the last problem. The Mummy had very little of it. Probably only sandstorm and animals because they are hard to work with. That's almost nothing for a blockbuster like this.

>First movie of Spider-Man Without Spider-Man Universe: Venom
>Actually considered a success at the box office
>First movie of Dark Universe: Dracula Untold >It didn't do well and they tried to say The Mummy 2017 was the first
>Then The Mummy 2017 didn't do well either.

Dark Universe is still in the lead.

The Mummy was kino and only a flop because /pol/tards boycotted it and Universoy wanted it to do as well as Infinity War.

RIP Dark Kinoverse

Spider-Man Without Spider-Man Universe is a better name than Sony’s official name, the Sony Universe of Marvel Characters.

>Has there been a more pathetic failed attempt at a cinematic universe?
Maybe the Terminator Genesys one?
Granted their doing another but its another reboot and is erasing everything after 2

Attached: 74A4819C-B12E-48A1-96BA-06F713F2769F.jpg (360x360, 27K)

At least that wasn’t hyped to high heaven like the DU.

Not user you asked question of, but;
Dracula would be a good start since Drac is immortal and not walled up in a tomb, so could introduce more time periods that could later come into play.
Wolfman being a curse that is passed on, could also be introduced and cover extra time periods, same with Frankenstein’s monster.

Your time concept is interesting

The Mummy was kino!!!FACT!!!

BBC Merchant-Ivory Kinoverse when?

Are you just jealous of the success of the MCU?

Venom and spiderverse were both successes.

I'd start with Invisible Man. He could be like evil Iron Man and it would estabilish modern day settings. At the end we will see unnamed doctor reading his files, nothing more. We don't know that his name yet.
2nd movie would be Phantom of the Opera, set in modern day London. This is where Prodigium would be introduced. They would be involved with Erik and his story. If i remember right ha was a criminal and Prodigium could be after him. We will also see Crowe but he will be called "dr Henry", Jekyll or Hyde wont be mentioned.
Now The Mummy as 3rd movie.

The MCU sucks as much nigger dick as your mom!!!FACT!!!

So far every spider related movie has been a success, dumbass MCUcks

You have no motivation, do you?

>MCU?
Not him but I detest the MCU. When I watch a movie, I don't want to have to watch 15 others in order to understand whats going on. Its a movie not a tv show.
It also leads to poor rip off attempts to make a cinematic universe

Into the Basedverse was a huge flop!!!FACT!!!

The third movie is on it's way, so its alive and well.

With the Mummy, you could have had some cursed early Dynastic Egyprians object or book of spells, that later somehow turns up in Dracula,
or part animal part man Gods that somehow are involved with the Wolfman curse,
plus, Gypsies are usually mentioned with the Wolfman, and you could somehow link this or Albanians/Ancient Balkan tribes with Ancient Egyptian magic.
Sofia/Mummy verbal put downs of later creatures as children would also be Kino.
Frankenstein expermenting with Ancient Egyptians technology in the British Museum, and examining “dead” mummies for preservation techniques.

Sets and locations were amazing. Her tomb was mindblowing and it didn't feel cartoonish. Catacombs were next too.
Whole Ahmanet-Nick relationship had a lot of original mummy vibes, I mean 30s one.
I didn't like that monsters agency and undead friend but that's all. Blonde sucked.

The Phantum of the Opera was set at the PARIS OPERA house.

sorry im late

Attached: 1520025231304.gif (779x512, 50K)

Yep, no motivation at all.

Hmm yea. So maybe use Paris then and have Prodigium as an international agency. London's HQ in The Mummy seems to be made in hurry, like they had no time to prepare it. Makes sense.

Ya got worked into a shoot ya pinhead!

Serves those faggots right. Nobody asked for a Hellboy reboot, just give us Hellbouy 3.

That wasn't even an official re-branding though it's just at comicon or something a tagline said "Welcome to the worlds of DC" before trailers/panel started

But it’s cheap to shoot in London

Spiderman has the best rogue's gallery of all capeshit tho. Debatable with The Flash at least. Are you another zoomie that's never cracked a comic book?

Naah keep mummy standalone. In fact that was the intention. Dark Universe was supposed to be a collection of monster movies connected by Prodigium. No crossovers between Dracula or Invisible Man or something. Introduce all monsters and then go for crossovers. I hope this is what they are going to do now.

>they opened up a small company at Sony called 'Ghost corps"complete with an office
>out of 10 reported projects, only the 2016 film and a cartoon series were created under the company
>2016 flopped, cartoon series has went unreleased
>Ghost Corps was shutdown as a result
I think this beats the Dark Universe, desu.

I just realized the Tom Cruise Mummy movie is just Lifeforce but with a hot mummy chick instead of a hot naked space vampire chick.

But they didn’t make a big deal out of it.

Cancelled Universe

The media sure did...

Jokes aside Akroyd did, but then again nobody listens to him.

Did the media really?

I can't see other similarities than sucking life energy.

>The chick escapes from a research facility in London
>The protagonist shares a psychic link with the chick
>Destructive climax in London

I feel so bad for her. It was supposed to be her big break out, co-star with Tom Cruise. They ruined it and all went to shit. Anyway, she was amazing and her performance saved the movie. It's not easy to be a creepy monster but also to show a bit of humanity.

Sofia will likely get other major roles.
Michelle Monaghan For instance was supposed to have a decent sized part in ‘Constantine’ but most of her scenes got cut, except that last bit towards the end with the fire sprinklers.
She’s still gotten major parts since.

Sofia is also very "unique" and she's from Africa so diversity points...
Btw she doesn't mind, she loves Ahmanet and would be "more than happy" if they let her come back.

There was not a single likeable thing about that movie. If you had put a fat JUST as lead and made the movie akin to Logan, it would have been pure kino. Brendan as a fat loser battling with a hot mummy. Just imagine it.

WB/DC is trying very hard to beat it.

Steampunk action flop based on comic series based on classic fantasy literature != cinematic universe attempt

They jinxed themselves by announcing a "cinematic universe" along with literally a name and a logo and nothing else. They probably thought the names attached would be enough credibility, but really they basically did a cringy cliche "idea guy" move and probably embarrassed some people who would have rather just thrown a bunch of shit against the wall for five years and based their big shared universe on whatever stuck.

People root for underdogs and like feeling like they're a part of an event. Announcing it years in advance and being very literal and uninspired about it didn't help that. The actual quality followed the jinxing and is sort of after-the-fact.

Is it more embarrassing to shitcan an idea before it can lose money, or shitcan an idea after it loses money?

Yeah, they should have done it this way, possibly with an office behind the scenes arranging plot points in the background.
Maybe they needed the buildup to raise money or something. Dang it.

Should I watch the new Mummy? I liked Van Helsing and Dracula Untold

>Announcing it years in advance
The Dark Universe has been officially announced on 22nd May and the movie came early in June.

It's like Van Helsing and Mission Impossible merged together. Or maybe Hellboy. I liked it more than Van Helsing, it's down to earth, not as over the top.

I get the feeling the execs at Universal got their knowledge of the MCU from the Incredible Hulk, which shouldn’t be surprising since THEY MADE IT.

>officially
we knew about The Dark Universe well in advance of the first film, unless i'm thinking about something else.

OP is a colossal faggot

How?

Yes but that was the gap between 22nd may and the mummy release date. It had no official name before. All I remember were these leaked images of cute and smol mummy girl in London. I don't remember if early trailers had something about Dark Universe at all.

Because he forgot about Ghost Busters. They had some Gost office and media asslicking it so much. It was even shilled by RT as 'fresh'. This failure is way more embarrassing than another 'rotten' mummy movie everyone shits on. Tomb of Dragon Emperor had similar reception.

Its possible i'm partially misremembering then and we didn't know the name and logo until later. I do recall them announcing a "cinematic universe" instead of just letting it play out and allowing the fans to figure out the obvious.

>Spiderman has the best rogue's gallery of all capeshit tho
No fucking way. Batman easily bests Spidey in that regard.

She's tight. Imagine grabbing these sexy hips and pounding her from behind.

There were dozens of shill articles from every major news site, which isn't something the average person cares about but it still counts. Not to mention trotting out the original cast to "pass the torch" on GMA-type shows and late night shit.

She'll be fine. It's all perspective, she was just the villain. The flop aura doesn't stick to that like it would to whoever the bitch was that played the romantic lead, or like if the movie had been headed up by one of those actors hollywood tries to push for a few years like Taylor Kitsch or that dude from Avatar and Terminator Salvation, where they star in bomb after bomb until the studios give up on them.

Jason Bourne was supposed to kick off a shared universe with Jeremy Renner and The Rock.

>She'll be fine. It's all perspective
She doesn't care, she's doing movies for fun, was a dancer for 15 years. She is aware of opinions on her unusual appearance and says that "she doesn't fit boxes"
Blonde "lead" girl is fucked. She was in King Arthur Legend of Sword and that was a massive flop. Few more and she's done.

It will be forever used as a cautionary tale on trying to push something to happen too hard.

Ghostbusters. They made a whole division for that shit

What about Ghost Busters? It was pushed so hard, calling people sexist or racist. Media went crazy. Meanwhile Dark Universe was pretty much hated from the begining. I don't remember articles defending it.

>Saddest thing is everyone could have told them it would fail before it even got started. It was a cynical attempt to cash in on the capeshit universe nonsense.
this applies to most DC movies as well tbqh

Not as cynical. There was Van Helsing movie and it was pretty much like Avengers. I mean quippy monster assembly action flick. And it was few years before that capeshit spam. Probably 2003. Batman nolanverse and MCU became popular few years later.

>The flop aura doesn't stick to that like it would to whoever the bitch was that played the romantic lead, or like if the movie had been headed up by one of those actors hollywood tries to push for a few years like Taylor Kitsch or that dude from Avatar and Terminator Salvation, where they star in bomb after bomb until the studios give up on them.
The thing though is Sam Worthington actually appears in Kino.
The films just haven’t done well.
He may still be able to get into decent films again if the right film comes around.

i'm so confused by how this is going to work. can they just not use spider-man in their spiderverse? what the fuck is the point

They have deal with MCU. However they are working on own universe - SUMC. Sony Universe Marvel Characters. And they have rights to 500 characters from Spiderman.

The Van Helsing movie cost a fortune, and flopped at the box office, plus it got crap critics reviews back when that was more of an issue.
Sadly, Steven Summers next flick, ‘G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra’, also flopped, and was routinely panned, and his next film ‘Odd Thomas’ got fucked by production financing involving advertising spending and a lawsuit, so got dumped directly to Netflix and video.
Sad, because ‘Odd Thomas’ was Kino, and could have had sequels.

>The Van Helsing movie cost a fortune, and flopped at the box office, plus it got crap critics reviews back when that was more of an issue.
Which is funny because Avengers did literally the same thing, yet made billion and had glorious reviews.

>marvel/dc capeshit thread: reeeeeeeee
>dark universe thread: actual discussion
how come

‘Van Helsing’ came out in 2004, which is back when TV ctitis like Ebert where still on TV doing movie review shows, which at the time still had a great deal of sway with the public.
‘Marvel's The Avengers’ came out in 2012, 8 years later, and 4 years after Ebert ended his TV critics reviews of movies, by which time IMDB and RottenTomatoes had taken over a large portion of the reviewing power of movies.
‘Van Helsing’ was based on a comic book, but was also the first movie based on the comc book.
‘Marvel's The Avengers’ came out after ‘Iron Man’, ‘The Incredible Hulk’, ‘Thor’, ‘Iron Man 2’, and ‘Captain America: The First Avenger’, had all been released, and had all done well enough at the box office.
Starting a cinematic universe once you’ve already released 5 films with 4 main characters that have done successfully, is far easier than trying to start a cinematic universe when the first film has flopped, or at least not done very well as regards expectations.
Also, Marvel characters have far more history than Van Helsing did, so there was more to draw on in regards to material and audience.

Attached: file.png (220x326, 158K)

>Also, Marvel characters have far more history than Van Helsing
Whaaaat?!
Characters from Van Helsing are literally 100 years old. Dracula came in 1880s. Frankenstein few years before that. Wolfman was a centuries old folklore.
If so, some Marvel characters are literally inspired by monsters from old novels.
Even if you ignore novels, monster movies came in 1930s. Early Marvel comics are from maybe 40s or so.

>love classic Universal Monsters
>love classic DC super heroes

>the recent attempts at making a new ongoing franchise for both were complete trainwrecks

Attached: Joker-Damaged-Tattoo_1050_591_81_s_c1.jpg (1050x591, 74K)

It was the third try, Van Helsings was supposed to be a a start and so was the Wolfman from 10 years ago

>love Universal Monsters
>they said the mummy sucks and is not like old
>k, skip it
>the mummy on HBO
>holy fuck it's actually closer to classic than that schlock from 90s
are they fucking brainlets? i mean it's still too much action packed but they got romance/seduction plot right, probably the most important thing about the mummy. why nobody told me? worthless critics.

We can all agree the DU was a failure

The Van Helsing from the comic book is far different than the Van Helsing in Bram Stoker’s book, which most people haven’t read.
While the Universal monsters may be old characters, it’s not the same as the comicbooks, that have been coming in a continuous stream from the same publisher for decades.
Universal might have made the original films, butbother companies have used the characters since then, and there’s been no continuity.
The Marvel films were made within a decade by the same company, and based on comic books which have a history of crossed story lines.
Marvel not succeeding in a Universe would have been more surprising then the fact they succeeded.
How DC keeps fucking things up is just a miracle of ineptitude, although it may have something to due with adapting some of the best individual comic book stories, then adapting good stories that are set up in a way to be expanded.

Wolfman and Creature aren't based on novels

Crossovers aren't a cinematic universe you fucking child

I liked Wolfman, too, user

Man fuck off the Avengers did not flop nor did the critics bash it

Make them horror movies or spooky adventures, not superheroes.

Dracula is the force behind various strange events, hinted at only here and there as some diabolical evil seeking to expand its power into the world.

Wolfman was someone who made a pact with the Devil to become a wolf (as per old werewolf lore) and now thoroughly regrets it and is seeking a way to escape the curse, maybe Dracula is using him as a tool and promising salvation.

Frankenstein's Monster holds the secrets of life, but the creator is dead and Dracula desperately wants to control it.

The Creature is some ancestral human offshoot from several hundred thousand years ago and its one of the last of a race older than Dracula, it has primal secrets the vampire desires.

The Mummy is a sorcerous high priest back from death who becomes a rival to Dracula and their struggle becomes a race to create a world seething with minions behind its surface.

What does /pol/ have to do with the mummy you retard

It's not like the Mummy was a huge failure. Why didn't they just continue making movies in the universe?

wow this is so much better than what they went with its embarrassing

Wasn't Guy Ritchie's King Arthur movie supposed to kick off a Knights of the Round Table universe?

Yeah, shame it didn't, it's a really fun movie

Morning

Independence Day Resurgence, and I actually liked the film.

Attached: Grey Gardens - 1975.mp4_snapshot_00.06.40_[2018.05.21_18.05.47].jpg (1440x1080, 562K)

>so its alive and well.

Unlike Harold

That’s a straight franchise, not a cinematic universe

It was?

more like ghost corpse

The first trailer for the Ritchie ‘Arthur’ movie just made it look like King Arthur but fone the the editing style of Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes films. I don’t recall any of the large beasts or whatever that wound up in the finished film.
The actual film seemed very different, like they dudn’t have the computer graphics done when the first trailer came out, so the film didn’t get the proper publicity for what type of film it actually was.

He was talking about Van Helsing. It was critically panned and flopped. Few years later Avengers did the same thing as Van Helsing, just with superheroes instead and this time it was praised.
Van Helsing was really ahead of it's time.

>Avengers flopped
mygodcanyoubelievethisguy

Attached: 3F52F969-CB48-4999-9689-3C0BC259EDDB.png (293x296, 116K)

To be fair at least they were smart enough to give up.

>Debatable with The Flash at least.
The Flash's rogues gallery is shit compared to both Spidey and Batman.

Are you going from the comics or the CW show?

Even Masrani has more website content, and they even actually updated their site for the new movie

Attached: CA4A4609-1F65-4785-851F-8AB6C58C9FF9.png (1136x640, 252K)

Not him, but do you have trouble reading? He said that Van Helsing flopped, yes, but Avengers did the exact same thing and succeeded. That is what surprises him.
Stupid furry nigger. Kill yourself.

Oh, I thought you were implying the Avengers was a bad movie like Van Helsing was. (Which it isn’t)

Bump

Another bump

I'm talking about Van Helsing and Avengers (2012) only, as standalone movies, not counting previous MCU. Both are on same level. Both are assembly action movies with lot of humor, yet double standards.

And one obviously does it better than the other