---
title: 'Why I''m EVEN MORE worried about the DCU now | Supergirl BOMBS'
source: 'https://youtube.com/watch?v=JakT3h5SK5o'
video_id: 'JakT3h5SK5o'
date: 2026-07-01
duration_sec: 1304
---

# Why I'm EVEN MORE worried about the DCU now | Supergirl BOMBS

> Source: [Why I'm EVEN MORE worried about the DCU now | Supergirl BOMBS](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JakT3h5SK5o)

## Summary



## Transcript

Welcome to the Heavy Spoilers Show. I'm
your host, Paul. And in this video, I
want to talk about why I'm even more
worried about the future of the DCU.
Now, if you follow the channel and
dedicate your very being to watching us,
then you might remember that 7 months
ago, I did a video talking about why I
was worried about the future of the DCU.
In it, I talked about the Paramount
merger, Supergirl, and Clayface, and why
I was worried about the level that those
projects would perform at. Now, things
have come to pass, and Supergirl has
opened below MorbiiUs.
I wasn't having a [ __ ] there, right? But
it's brought in just $68 million
worldwide, which is not good when you're
wanting to build something that's going
to rival and potentially even surpass
Marvel. To be fair, though, MorbiiUs did
make one more billion dollars. So, yeah,
everything's going to fall short. But I
think whatever way you look at it,
there's going to be a lot of worries
about the long-term viability of the
DCU. Hell, I was even thinking like
yesterday, like how many out of the last
20 DC movies have actually made money?
because I think we're talking in the
single figures if you start adding it
up. Beyond just the box office
performances though and numbers on the
streaming shows like Creature Commandos
and Peacemaker, there's also a massive
corporate upheaval. So, in this video, I
want to discuss the state of things and
where I think things will likely end up.
Obviously, I want to frame this more as
a conversation as well. So, if you want
to add to it, disagree with me or
whatever, then the comment section below
is exactly where you can go. And I don't
mean that in like a bad way like go to
the comment section. Go then have a have
a good time have a read and have a chat.
Now in order to understand the current
anxieties about the future we can simply
look at the past. I was there Gandalf
thousands of years ago and I remember
what happened with Zack Snder. In 2013
he launched Man of Steel and though
things weren't wellreceived critically
right from the off. The universe
actually produced lots of financial
successes. Man of Steel did a similar
number to Superman from last year and on
top of that you had Blu-ray sales and so
on and so on. though it's pretty
contested I think because of the
aftermarket and inflation that Man of
Steel has outperformed Superman because
yeah physical media sales were great
aftermarket you also had the rental
market like Blockbusters then you had
them selling things to cable networks
and blah blah blah there was lots of
stuff back then that doesn't exist today
I think they then expected Batman v
Superman to make a billion and when it
didn't they started to worry but I think
if they got those numbers today they'd
actually be happy with them Woman did
well critically and commercially. And
Aquaman grossed over a billion. And it
was all because of that Pitbull song in
it that I had burned out of my brain
until people started talking about
Needle Drops this weekend and how the
Supergirl one was the worst one ever.
And someone was like, "No, the Pitbull
one from Aquaman." And I was like,
"Yeah, fair enough. That was the worst."
There was also a Suicide Squad as well,
and things did seem to be going well, at
least financially. However, due to
critical reception and a personal
tragedy in Snider's life, that vision
kind of got brushed to the side in favor
of doing more light-hearted things.
Eventually, we got later entries that
collapsed under the weight of production
issues, re-shoots, and external
controversies. And all this culminated
in stuff like The Flash. The Rock was
also vying for his own universe. Henry
Caval was announcing he was back as
Superman one day and then fired the
next. And you just had this constant
state of flux where it seemed like
everything was up in the air. Now, on
top of this, I think there's definitely
been a decline in audience interest
across the board when it comes to these
superhero movies. I talked about this in
the last video and kind of likened it to
music tastes. For example, you can look
throughout time and see almost every
decade has its own style of music that
dominates pop culture. Whether it's rock
and roll in the '60s, disco in the 70s,
80s music in the 80s, trends tend to
rise and then become popular and then
die out before being replaced by
something else. Tastes change. Western
movies weren't popular forever and it
for sure as [ __ ] won't happen with
superhero movies. But yeah, because of
taste changing, people getting sick of
stuff. I do think that the comic book
movie genre is on its way out. Sure, we
will have big successes. I'm sure
Doomsday will do well. I'm sure
Spider-Man will, Batman will always do
well, but these lesserknown characters,
people just aren't interested and it's
not going to draw people in. You have so
many projects at this point that we've
kind of hit a point where it's all sort
of much of a muchness. So, I did think
when James Gun came out and announced
they had a brand new phase that maybe it
wouldn't even get brought to fruition
because people are kind of past the
point of caring. Was also a bit worried
because there wasn't a full-on hard
reset, which I personally think was
something they needed to do. I know a
couple of people who don't even realize
this is a brand new universe because
things just seem like there's no real
disconnect between what's come before
and this. Instead, they're kind of still
tethered to the previous movies purely
due to retaining some things. I'm a big
fan of the phrase, don't be afraid to
kill your darlings. And I do think
though Gun had built up some characters.
You know, he'd done a lot of work. He
did need to hard reset and basically get
rid of those characters as well and just
start things a fresh. Because of that
though, all the hang-ups and hangovers
from the previous universe are still
going to exist, even if they're coming
out and clearly saying that this is DC's
chapter 1, gods and monsters. But either
way, the DC cinematic universe has been
a mess for over a decade now. Whether
it's Snider getting replaced on Justice
League by Joss Weeden, the Hermadverse,
The Rock, and then all the Gunverse were
always in a state of flux where the
studio is clearly just having these
knee-jerk reactions at the first sign of
trouble. However, Superman did kind of
deliver on the promise of guns, saying
that they were going for quality. Now,
I've been pretty open in saying that I I
personally didn't enjoy the movie that
much, but I know I'm in the minority and
that it was wellreceived. So, even with
that, I was like, "Yeah, fair enough.
wasn't for me, but things will get
better. Also, just as a side note, um I
am someone who sometimes takes a long
time to adjust to things. I'm ashamed to
admit this, uh but I really didn't like
Batman Begins or Casino Royale when they
first came out. They were just so
different to what I thought stuff should
be that when they dropped, I was like,
"This this ain't for me. This isn't like
it was back in my day." I was about 18
years old. But yeah, these days are like
two of my favorite films. And there was
a part of me that thought, I can see the
good in this. It's just not for me right
now in terms of where I am. I think
where Gun got stuff bang on though was
with the hopeful tone, the casting, and
the sort of comic book metropolis that
was brought to life on screen. In
general, I get a lot of [ __ ] on the
channel for seeming like a gun hater.
But I think the Guardians trilogy was
excellent, and I have liked way more of
his stuff than I haven't actually also
think he's been really good to YouTubers
as well. and all those interviews he did
with like Ryan and Boba talks, you know,
it was something he didn't have to do,
but in my eyes was really positive and
helped the show that the studios
appreciate the people who love and
support their stuff. But being
realistic, it was clear that the film
didn't quite hit the mark when it came
to its worldwide reception. It
underperformed globally and kind of got
propped up by its US box office, which
even led to people at the studio saying
that maybe the rest of the world just
didn't like Superman, which uh I
probably disagree with, but where are we
going next? Supergirl. Oh no. But look,
it seemed like things were going in the
right direction. And though it didn't
break the bank, it was quite a good
starting off point and actually the
first DC film to make money in a long
time outside of the Matt Reeves Batman
stuff. So, it felt like it was starting
the momentum and might justify a
multi-year investment for the audience.
Now, when they said Supergirl and
Clayface were the next two films, I was
a bit like m before as well when I was
like, "What's next? Supergirl." I wasn't
saying it cuz I'm sexist. I was saying
cuz Superman wasn't like worldwide and
Supergirl is a spit off of that. I think
I've avoided the cancellation there. In
general though, I think Gun
sensibilities are to take obscure
characters that aren't necessarily the
big names and push them forward to try
and give audiences something new and
fresh. In general, I think he's someone
who's just attracted to those kind of
characters. And you could kind of tell
that by the fact the first project in
the DCU was Creature Commandos. Hell,
Gun was even given free reign when he
was hired to make Suicide Squad. And out
of everything, that is the project that
he said he wanted to make the most. Now,
I am someone who is a bit I don't know
adverse to risk when it comes to
building a foundation. So, I personally
think they should have established the
trinity first and basically have done
Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. Yes,
I am basic. I think though when you're
building something that you should have
the characters that are the safest bests
first because that's going to get the
most eyeballs on them and make more
people interested in exploring the other
characters. I know Marvel didn't lead
with their big names either, but that's
because they literally had nothing else
to work with, but I'm just kind of
baffled that they've had over like nine
flops in a row in the DCU and have still
come out sort of betting on the
sealisters. And mate, the other day I
seen them announced Jimmy Olsen and
Guerilla Garage Show and I was a bit
like I I don't know, mate. I don't know.
They need to move beyond just making
projects for a small core audience,
which is kind of the problem that Star
Wars has run into as well. So, Supergirl
I was a bit trepidacious on. Not because
I'm sexist, you son of a [ __ ] Uh, but
because she hadn't been in a big film
and both her solo movie in the Flash
bombed at the box office. Now, where
doubts started to creep in was because
of Woman of Tomorrow. I'm pretty sure
this is the highest selling Supergirl
comic of all time. And across the board,
it's also regarded as being the best. It
seemed like something that could really
show that they valued quality first. And
this is something that Gun was pushing
as well. Right out the gate, he was
saying that DC was going to be a studio
where they wouldn't greenlight a movie
unless the script was excellent, and we
even saw projects fall by the wayside
that didn't seem to live up to it. For
example, you go back to that original
video where he announces the slay and
there's like loads there that has either
been cancelled or we just haven't heard
about. I also think the way that shared
movie universes in general work make
them pretty difficult to run. For
example, Matt Reeves's Batman part two
has got a lot of [ __ ] because of how
long it's taken to make. But writing a
script, finishing the script, and then
shooting it, that's how movies used to
be made. You see, back in the day, kids,
uh, if you were a screenwriter, you'd
you'd come up with the idea for the
story. You'd sit down, you'd write out
the whole thing, you'd get the
beginning, middle, and end, hand it in,
and go, "This is good. I like it. Maybe
change this. Have we got the edits all
done?" Great. It's all good to go. we're
gonna go make the movie. Now though,
they seem to just go in and hodge podge
something together, film it, and figure
it out as they're making it, which is
something that's gonna cause issues.
Though they've said that's not what
they're doing at DC, it's clear this
movie didn't have things nailed down and
that they changed quite a lot in
post-prouction. Unfortunately, with
shared universes, you ultimately have to
rush into stuff because if you don't,
there's too big of a gap between
projects. You might even hit the point
where you announce something, stuff
stalls, and then you can't really make
it because the gap is too big and
there's a big clash between where you
are now and where you were when you
announced things. See Blade for example.
But because of Woman of Tomorrow, how
good that that was. James Gun being
like, we're not going to make [ __ ]
around here. Superman also being good as
well. It seemed like things were going
to be good. Now, in all of this, looming
on the horizon was Netflix and
Paramount's bid to buy Warner Brothers.
said this in the last video, but
obviously, you know, they're going to be
buying this company and wanting to make
money. I can see them totally coming in
and basically wanting to creatively
stifle gun sensibilities and do the
basic [ __ ] strategy that I talked about
before. Time is something we only get a
finite amount of. And that's also the
case with money. So, I can really see
them coming in and being like, look,
shared universes cost billions and
billions of dollars cuz you're producing
so many like $250 million movies. Um,
they take years and years to produce
these films. And why are we doing this
for these B and C list characters when
we could just be making a Batman movie
that actually makes back money? I don't
even think fans can be mad at the studio
either cuz to Warner Brothers credit,
they've given lots of characters their
own solo films and taking risks. Wonder
Woman starred in BBS, two versions of
Justice League, and also got two solo
movies. And she was in Shazam, too, as
well. I've just remembered that. Not in
the script, but I just remembered it.
But Aquaman was the same and we got two
Shazam movies, Black Adam, Blue Beetle,
The Flash. There was lots of characters
given chances and lots that bombed. So,
back to formula it is. Nah, but I think
Supergirl has possibly shown the real
results of what these characters can do
financially, and I think Paramount will
probably want to steer the ship into the
safer bet territory, which I'm not sure
if James Gun wants to do judging off his
past choices. Beyond that, his contract
is also up in 2027, so either party
could decide the directions not right
for them, and they have the actual
financial results to worry them as well.
Supergirl is estimated to have a budget
between $170 and $186 million, and from
the off, it faced a litany of
nightmares. The film went through three
composers, and there was also a rumored
25 minutes cut from the film.
Pre-release tracking was also quite low
as well, with them estimating the movie
might make $50 million domestically. We
now know though that it made just 38
million and this was alarming for a
number of reasons. It definitely won't
be turning a profit and I think it
represents a big drop from the launch of
Superman. Now, anytime I've seen this
brought up, um the obvious reply is to
say that the MCU phase 1 movies didn't
do crazy numbers either. Think you have
to remember though that that's from the
time before the superhero craze really
took off. You're kind of comparing the
first couple of disco albums to
something released in the 80s. just two
totally different time periods and
expectations are of course wildly
different. Plus, we just have so many
superhero projects right now. It's just
contextwise,
it's not the same thing as MCU phase 1.
I think when we live in a society where
Marvel Studios Fantastic 4 movie
underperforms that you have to realize
that things just aren't the same and the
market's totally different. I can
guarantee right now that even if our
lord and savior Christopher Nolan just
kept making Batman movies every two
years that the ones he was releasing now
wouldn't be doing as well as the Dark
Knight. Now, had the film been
wellreceived and I think that could be
spun that there might be other reasons
for the performance. Ultimately though,
word of mouth was terrible and the
audience scores and reviews are pretty
low in general. So, yeah, just I don't
think it was ever going to perform well
because of the movie that they made. I'm
sure of course there will be people who
enjoy it, but I think we have a good
picture of the public consensus and it's
pretty clear people disliked it than
liked it. Also know there's people
saying that it's because people don't
want women led superhero movies but like
um Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel
disprove that by quite a bit. They show
that they can be successful, but you
have to do something that really sells
the movie which this film just didn't
have. you know, Krypto pissing on a
picture of Superman as the first shot
probably pissed people off. Uh, and the
buzz around the film, every article that
came out, it just seemed like things got
more and more negative. I did even think
in general that this might be a makeup
break year for the DCU. We have
Supergirl, Lanterns on TV, Clayface, and
then the production of Man of Tomorrow.
So, Supergirl is kind of if they can
successfully bring side characters who
cameoed in films to be successes on
their own. Lens is whether they can make
a TV streaming show a big success if
they're using some of their A-listers
and Clayface is whether the dark and
disturbing stuff that makes up the
monster part of Gods and Monsters is
going to be wellreceived too. If all
these fail to generate sufficient
revenue, then I do think Warner Brothers
might reassess their commitments.
They've done it in the past. And the
worst thing is they didn't even warn a
brother. Yes. Yes, we did it again. This
son of a [ __ ] Now, we did hear that
David Ellison flew out to me. James Gun
got a man of tomorrow to say he was
invested in the vision, but I think guns
leadership and creative control is tied
to the old regime, so they might impose
different things. There also might be
more financial oversight, and they could
even force DC to prioritize other IPs.
Think DC's value is completely
undeniable as a whole, but they'll
probably want to focus on the surefire
wins as opposed to taking risks. Though
Gun did make Supergirl, per se, it
definitely has a lot of his fingerprints
on it. And you know, whenever something
does badly, people are always looking
for someone to blame. And I think the
blame is probably going to fall at his
feet because he's the face of the
studio. If subsequent entries like
Clayface or Lanterns also struggle, it's
because of his choices. And the entire
shared universe experiment could be
deemed too risky or expensive. And
profitability is always a pressure.
Normally, if a film doesn't do well
critically, like Minecraft or something,
you can brush it to the side because
it's done so well financially. But if a
film like Supergirl underperforms
theatrically, then it gets intense
scrutiny, not only from the audience,
YouTubers like me, but also from the
studio itself. So, I think the timing of
this and the results are basically yeah,
not making me feel confident that we
have a universe in slay that lasts 10
years or more. Gun already talked to
Boba talks about this as well and said
that after Man of Tomorrow, he is unsure
where things could be heading and if
he'll even be the one who's doing it.
Again, that contract ends in 2027. And I
do even wonder if the wheels are in
motion right now behind the scenes and
they're just putting on a happy face
while they're rolling things on Man of
Tomorrow. God knows they've already seen
the results of coming out and being
like, "Oh, all those movies coming out,
the next four, mate. Don't bother going
to see them, mate. We're restarting the
universe." And that basically killed
Shazam 2, the Flash, Blue Beetle, and
Aquaman 2. So, I can't see them being
like, "Oh, yeah, we're scrapping this,
mate. Things will be quiet if it's
happening." Now, beyond that, I know it
seems like I'm saying the sky is
falling. Uh, but I don't think these
worries are baseless and in fact are
pretty grounded in corporate reality and
observable data. The Paramount
acquisition brings in some big
uncertainty. And no matter what business
you're in, new leadership coming in
always has a focus on clear paths to
profitability and it's normally less
tolerant to losses. Superman did well,
but not at the point of basically
insulated the franchise from other
criticisms in the way that Spider-Man
and Multiverse of Madness helped
dissuade criticism around some of the
bombs in the recent MCU phases. That
said, I do wonder if the past shakeups
and guns reputation in general might
also help. I'm really of the mind that
even if things keep bombing, they should
just steer the course, stay with how
things are, wrap things up in a team of
film, and then finish things after that.
Tell a complete story. Like, in general,
mate, if Zack Snder had got to release
Justice League, they had that that set
of films. That would have been it. There
would have been no more chaos. It was
the fact they didn't let things wrap up
that caused so many issues, so much
reaction, and I think the audience will
just lose faith and not get invested in
things going forward. If it's like, oh,
here's another reboot. Make sure you get
excited about it. We might stop making
them in two years time and reboot again.
It's kind of like, fool me once, shame
on me. Fool me twice, shame on you. You
You can't get fooled again. Basically, I
think it would be a bad strategy in
general to do another reboot after this.
Um, so even if I'm not haven't really
enjoyed either Superman or Supergirl
that much, um, I think it would be a
mistake to just reboot things once more.
Gun's track record with Guardians of the
Galaxy and the Suicide Squad, they
demonstrate an ability to deliver
distinctive superhero fair that works
for the majority of the audience. After
what's happened this weekend, I think
they really need to come out swinging
and that Comic- Con needs to have some
massive, massive announcements. I also
think they could do something with
Clayface where they have a Batman cameo
and do it where that's when they
announce who's playing him. If you cast
your mind back to the Flash screenings,
you might remember that they cut off
before revealing who is playing Batman.
There was lots of rumors there was a
past actor and I remember hearing it and
being like, "Oh, mate, it's got to be
Bale. Christian Bale is back." wasn't
the case obviously, but stuff like that
can really elevate hype and I think that
would get a lot of eyeballs on the film
and it probably wouldn't be that
difficult to just add in that scene and
doing like a minute long or even 30
seconds could add a couple million to
the box office. Ultimately though, DC
survival will depend on how Supergirl
legs out and how everything does between
now and Man of Tomorrow. However,
without stronger box office results and
stable corporate support, the fears that
the DCU may not continue in its current
ambitious form, I feel are very real.
The next 12 to 18 months will likely
determine whether this reboot becomes a
sustained success story or another
chapter in DC's long history of
cinematic reinvention and
disappointment. I even wonder like after
this what Gun's going to do. Um, and I
do kind of hope that he goes and
stretches his creative muscles on
something else. I'd love to see him do a
horror movie or something. In general,
as someone who's been covering this
genre for nearly 10 years myself, I can
imagine being in this space is quite
creatively limiting. Um, especially if
you're doing decades and decades of it.
So, I hope he just goes off and makes
something else if this falls apart, but
I also kind of hope that it doesn't fall
apart. But yeah, that's my worries in
regards to how things have gone this
weekend. And I'd of course love to hear
your thoughts on whether you disagree,
whether you agree. If you've got
anything to add, leave it all below. You
can also follow us on Instagram at Heavy
Spoilers and keep up to date with
everything we're doing. Did you know as
well that members of the channel also
get early access to videos like this
every single week and if you click the
join button, you get at least one
breakdown a week, a week before anyone
else. Cost just 99 cents a month, very,
very low price. Get a lot of content for
that. You're going to have a nice nice
life. Anyway, huge thank you for sitting
through this bit of a rant. Uh, and I'll
see you on the next one. Take care.