Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies

DC's 'Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom' Flops at the Box Office (variety.com) 114

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom "is headed for one of the lowest starts in the history of the DC Cinematic Universe," writes the Hollywood Reporter, "with a projected four-day Christmas weekend gross of $40 million, including $28 million for the three days."

"The sequel cost $205 million," notes Variety, "and ranks among the worst debuts of the year for a superhero movie." It's softer than November's misfire The Marvels ($47 million), which ended its run as the lowest-grossing installment in the history of Disney's Marvel Cinematic Universe. The Marvels was shocking because it was the rare MCU movie to tumble out of the gate.

By contrast, Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom is shaping up to be the fourth of four DC movies this year to crumble at the box office. Already in 2023, The Flash ($55 million debut), Shazam! Fury of the Gods ($30 million debut) and Blue Beetle ($25 million debut) majorly flopped in theaters.

December releases are known to start slower but enjoy staying power through the new year. That was the case with 2018's Aquaman, which opened unspectacularly to $67 million and powered to $335 million in North America (and $1.15 billion globally). However, "Aquaman 2" faces choppier waters. Beyond the minimal buzz and terrible reviews, The Lost Kingdom is the final installment before DC's new bosses, James Gunn and Peter Safran, reset the sprawling superhero universe without heroes like Jason Momoa's Arthur Curry to save the day.

A movie consultant tells Variety that superhero films should perform better in 2024 with the release of Joker 2, Venom 3 and Deadpool 3.

As for Aquaman, the Hollywood Reporter writes that "The hope now is that moviegoing will pick up in earnest once presents are unwrapped on Monday. (Hollywood studios never like it when Dec. 25 falls on a Monday since it messes with the weekend.)"

The Verge argues that, for better or worse, Aquaman 2 is the quintessential product of the DC Extended Universe: In Aquaman and The Lost Kingdom, you can plainly see just how much attention Warner Bros. has been paying to the public's response to its own unwieldy franchise of comic book adaptations and to the direction that its competitors like Disney / Marvel have been taking their projects lately. But in the wake of the entire DCEU being shuttered and set aside in favor of a hard reboot, you can also see The Lost Kingdom as a monument to everything that was great (which was not a lot) and terrible about this particular superhero movie experiment.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DC's 'Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom' Flops at the Box Office

Comments Filter:
  • by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @01:57PM (#64103427) Homepage

    You know, instead of relying on pretty faces, CGI and political messages, have they thought about...perhaps...you know...telling a good story well?

    Crazy, I know, but they should give it a shot and see what happens.

    • by Midnight_Falcon ( 2432802 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @02:11PM (#64103467)
      Finally it appears someone has gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

        Underestimate? Have you seen the US presidential election polls?

        Actually, have you seen who is even in the polls?

        Americans have made Idiocracy a documentary. The fact that the nth cretinous Marvel DC Comic superhero movie didn't appeal to them just means they're probably distracted with something even more stupid at the moment.

    • Lol well the usual cotton headed ninny mugginses can't complain about it being female led as they often so when a film does badly.

      Still daft. Loads of good art is very explicitly political.

    • by jonwil ( 467024 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @02:41PM (#64103531)

      The success of that film about nuclear bombs (which had a good story and didn't rely on flashy CGI, superheroes in fancy costumes etc) should show Hollywood that compelling stories CAN get bums in seats and in big numbers.

      • Yup. Godzilla was absolutely amazing.

      • Are you referring to Dr. Strangelove?
        That was a while ago.

        • by mjwx ( 966435 )

          Are you referring to Dr. Strangelove?
          That was a while ago.

          I suspect so. It's a classic that was loaded with political stings and barbs of the day.

          It also had some severe budgetary issues, the production cost was high. Sellers, who played 3 major roles in the film came at a very high wage. Kubrik said he got "3 actors for the price of 6" as $1 million of the films $1.8 million budget went to Sellers. The cost of flying a B17 over the arctic was also quite expensive (that's where they got the footage for the flight sequences).

          However it paid off because it was

      • The success of that film about nuclear bombs (which had a good story and didn't rely on flashy CGI, superheroes in fancy costumes etc) should show Hollywood that compelling stories CAN get bums in seats and in big numbers.

        Except the people in Hollywood who have the money are unable to discern a great story from a flashy CGI-fest. The only thing they can see or understand is money. Hollywood is entirely corrupted.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Naa, storytelling is soooo yesterday! And it is risky, what if people do not like the story? Better stick to something proven and do it again. That must work! Right?

      In other news, I think the whole "blockbuster" idea is basically over and the studios still depending on it need to die.

    • That's crazy talk. In related news, stay tuned for another Batman and/or Superman installment. DC seems to always jump back to those two properties after they fail to produce results with anything else.
    • When were comics ever about that? These were cheap books designed for children. What are people expecting?

      • It's...a bit more complex than that, wouldn't you say?

        First of all, some comics were like that certainly. So the target audience derived from those comics would be nostalgia for adults.

        Other comics were decidedly less so; Demon in a Bottle?

        My point is; there's no reason why the super hero genre should be considered dead or played out; merely that hollywood's inability to tell a decent story is limiting it's evolution.

    • You know, instead of relying on pretty faces,

      How much of that $200M cost is guaranteed payments to the movie's stars?

    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Yeah, the reviews of the movie weren't good. It's just a middling movie that they did one too many.

      Then again, given the excess of comic book movies, it's likely the public is just exhausted of the endless comic book movies coming out every week.

    • Tell a story? You'd need Joss Whedon to do that. He's the real hero of the Marvel Universe.

    • "stories are underrated" (exurpt from a memo at DC)

      I'm not even onboard with the pretty faces thing. Momoa is a name but Amber Heard? Well she is really pretty, but I didn't go see this movie in the theater because she's in it. And the rest of the cast? Either not enough screen time to really count them, or it's credit soup of basically cameos.

      I'm sorry, but there's so much episodic content out there where they're telling us real stories I just don't know how interested we all are in a poorly told story

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Now that Gunn is in charge, things should get better.

    • They are telling a story. The problem is that it has all the plot twists & sophistication of an episode of Paw Patrol stretched out over 2 hours. If you want to watch body builders in Spandex(TM) have spats with each other & do some acrobatic, homoerotic wrestling, WWE is more entertaining.
    • Good writers cost money and the producers are looking to cut corners.
    • The movie just literally sucked. I don't know how any competent professional involved in making it couldn't see it going off the rails so quickly.

      The basic plot (spoiler alert) is that a guy, so but hurt over his father being killed seeks revenge on the "people of the sea" and aided by a clever Asian scientist concocts a plan to burn some fantastical substance that seems it's only purpose it so destroy the planet, and only the wise fish people of the sea can save the planet from this madman.

      FFS, what was th

    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      You know, instead of relying on pretty faces, CGI and political messages, have they thought about...perhaps...you know...telling a good story well?

      Crazy, I know, but they should give it a shot and see what happens.

      And the thing is, people are fine with political messages as long as the movie is entertaining. There's a long history of political films becoming classics. Point is, that's not the problem here.

      The problem is that the formula has become stale. Superhero movies are a dime a dozen, to use an Americanism. The same formula that made X-Men a hit 20 odd years ago just doesn't cut it any more, also they're running out of source material, scraping the bottom of the barrel at Marvel/DC with 3rd rate characters f

  • by bb_matt ( 5705262 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @02:06PM (#64103457)

    Could this be a sign that the public are largely bored of the genre now?
    Hollywood have been riding it for what feels like a decade now - and it's starting to really show.
    Bloated budgets, repetitive formula, overburdened with CGI.

    Sure, sometimes it's good just to turn your brain down a bit and let it all wash over - just a fun ride - but if it's one you've ridden time and time again, it gets boring.

    I suspect cinema is still having a rough time post pandemic - when new theatre releases are often released to streaming just weeks later and sometimes even simultaneously, it's a tough ask for people now used to watching the latest movies in the comfort of their own homes vs. driving to a theatre and sitting in a crowded noisy space.
    The big screen is great and all, but we now have huge TV screens too.

    I know where I'd rather watch a movie.

    So perhaps this; by all accounts; fairly lacklustre title will recoup losses on streaming platforms in the weeks and months ahead.

    And maybe, just maybe, Hollywood will have a 70's style revival and we'll get more daring original content - maybe someone will take some risks again.
    I'm not holding my breath...

    • by HBI ( 10338492 )

      I doubt it. I think the issue here is that they diverged too far from the content created in the 60s-80s heyday of comics. Those people working on comics in that era were driven by economic survival (of themselves and the comic publishers) to write good stories, do good artwork, etc. Using their material as a basis for movies was a pretty inspired idea. Failing to recognize the reason why the movies were successful is the problem here. Lots of material yet to be mined.

      • I doubt it. I think the issue here is that they diverged too far from the content created in the 60s-80s heyday of comics. Those people working on comics in that era were driven by economic survival (of themselves and the comic publishers) to write good stories, do good artwork, etc. Using their material as a basis for movies was a pretty inspired idea. Failing to recognize the reason why the movies were successful is the problem here. Lots of material yet to be mined.

        I hear you, but I wonder if Hollywood does?

        There's so many amazing stories just waiting to be filmed, but that does require risk taking - something Hollywood seems averse to right now.
        Perhaps I'm over simplifying things, but the industry has been stuck in this bind quite a lot historically.
        One notable period was probably from the mid-60's to the early-70's - then seemingly almost overnight, risks started being taken with maverick directors and actors and we got a golden age of cinema on the back of that. It

        • by HBI ( 10338492 )

          It's a rent-seeking issue, like so many others in our society. I wish I had a solution. The barriers to entry are high, and the current rent-seekers have to be inclined toward risk taking by potential rewards.

          • It's a rent-seeking issue, like so many others in our society. I wish I had a solution. The barriers to entry are high, and the current rent-seekers have to be inclined toward risk taking by potential rewards.

            I also think they are too focused on great rewards rather than smaller ones.

    • by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @02:14PM (#64103475) Homepage

      I don't know that people are tired of it, but they are tired of the lazy writing and being proselytize at.

      What Marvel should be doing is really leaning into their villains, instead of killing them off every movie. Make them compelling, interesting. Make them the heroes of their own stories ( killmonger and thanos jump to mind ). Give the protagonists something meaningful to strive against.

      They should also be more excited about a hero's limitations rather than what they can do. What can't their powers do is at least as interesting as what they can do. Play that angle up, show them failing, so when they succeed it actually means something...instead of the usual "plot armor" of the more recent flicks.

      Personally, I'd love to see an inversion of the good vs evil formula; start it out with the hero taking what they think is the moral stance, only for them to grow and see how wrong they were over the course of the movie, until you see that the villain was right the entire time ( think: ala Farscape ).

      • Thanos does not need a sympathetic movie, he has a whole political party/movement in the USA already. It would help do more harm; it's pretty bad when a politician openly embraces Thanos in "good fun" and it turns out to not be ignorance of the meaning.

        We certainly do not need bad is good movies; people are not smart enough to grasp the heavily warn out cliche of superhero stories: the good guys following the rules they enforce without hypocrisy and not getting down to the level of the villains - who when

        • Uh...ok.

          Perhaps up your meds a bit, then go watch Farscape. They really nailed a great "good" vs "evil" dynamic there, both with Crais and then 100% with Scorpious.

          Just phenomenal work.

      • I don't know that people are tired of it, but they are tired of the lazy writing and being proselytize at.

        Did any of those things happen with the movies in question? This shit all started with the first X-Men back in the year 2000. It was a hit and Hollywood found a goldmine of content to exploit. Nearly a quarter century of comic book movies now so of course the bottom will fall out at some point.

    • I think a lot of people are getting sick and fucking tired of shit comic book movies. And all comic book movies are shit. When they first came out they were a novelty nostalgia thing. And of course retards running Hollywood said, let's make dozens of the same thing with only costume changes and little variation. Half a dozen batmans, half a dozen spidermans, half a dozen supermans, villains, minor comic book characters, etc etc etc. There's a reason online streaming series and movies are so big and movie au
    • that would've been post comic code but before stuff like Crisis on Infinite Earths & Moore & Morison's Swampthing & Animal Man runs...

      I guess there was some neat stuff in the late 70s, and admittedly I'm not comic historian, but I seem to remember that period being pretty bleh because of all the censorship. If you wanted something good in the 60s and 70s you were ready books because that was about the only thing not heavily censored (and even then...).
    • DC universe has a lot of great potential for movies. They've been really bad at making them into movies for some reason.

      They don't even have to dig far, like The Justice League TV series [wikipedia.org] was watchable and the characters were fun. Watching the Batman/Superman relationship develop over time was engaging.

      Then the was Batman: The Animated Series. A lot of great stories there. It wasn't massive multi-verse-saving stories, it was usually some kind of detective story. Tons of fun.

      For some reason they've been
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by GotNoRice ( 7207988 )
      People are also tired of movies that portray their own country in such a negative light, casting our own military as the "bad guys" in many cases (though I'm sure that helps sell tickets in China). That's a pretty stark contrast to the classic Superman movies, etc. Get woke, go broke.
      • People are also tired of movies that portray their own country in such a negative light, casting our own military as the "bad guys" in many cases (though I'm sure that helps sell tickets in China). That's a pretty stark contrast to the classic Superman movies, etc. Get woke, go broke.

        Name one movie where the US military is the bad guy. The fact is the US military is the bad guy in lots of scenarios.

        You also can't name one company who is now broke from going woke, whatever your definition of that might be.

        • by vivian ( 156520 )

          Battleship.
          That movie was a complete troll of the US navy. The aliens were explicitly shown to not target civilians, tried to avoid non-military casualties and even minimised damage against military targets where possible, while the navy went in guns blazing before there was any provocation.
          Even the final credits song was an anti-war song (Favorite Son
            by Creedence Clearwater) yet most people seem to think it's a homage to the US Navy.

      • by aergern ( 127031 )

        Your whole statement is just yelling from a trailer park. You don't know what woke means outside of what Fox and the GOP tell you it means and I'm pretty sure most of marvel and DC's movies said fuck all that our military were bad guys .. hell, I'd bet a crisp $100 you never served as those who talk shit the loudest and say this, had bone spurs. /s

    • Could this be a sign that the public are largely bored of the genre now?

      I kinda got bored with them a while ago. First, just about any Michael Bay movie, then the DC movies, as I find them less "fun" than the Marvel ones, then Marvel, etc..., but they're all fairly simple smash-em-up movies, with lots of (too much) repetition in the action/fight scenes -- ya, we. get. it. you can smash up LOTs of stuff in CGI, (yawn) move on...

      Also annoying is there also seems to be many people doing a lot of dumb things, obviously needed to keep the movie, or next movie, on track -- like w

    • "Hollywood have been riding it for what feels like a decade now - and it's starting to really show. Bloated budgets, repetitive formula, overburdened with CGI." Make that two. It seems like the current level of pumping out superhero flicks started in the early 2000s.
    • I like to see both marvel and DC stoke their bench a little. Worked with Guardians, for a bit anyway. DC has their "dark"-verse which plays out for me mostly in animation which still suffers from "I'll use my freeze ray" stiffness/exposition/demostrativedelivery. I tried to like many of those shows but writing sucks so I never get the story. I think some batman is excepted. I think for original content, they should have more licensing to people who are into and have a passion for the property and less centr
    • have you been under a rock?

      the boys in the boat
      maestro
      oppenhiemer
      killers of the flower moon
      the holdovers ( remastered or something )
  • You can't poop the bed if you're aquaman, right?

  • Pretty much described the comics verse. Now it's just comically bad.
  • Every Aquaman movie has sucked. Most of the DC movies have sucked. The exceptions exist mostly for Batman. But even their most successful movies have huge glaring issues - mostly related to sound mixing and balancing when not at a theater.

  • My wife and I both enjoyed Aquaman 2 etc., so we're wrong. Great. Then I read this:

    "superhero films should perform better in 2024 with the release of Joker 2, Venom 3 and Deadpool 3"

    Three superhero films we will NOT. Be seeing. Joker is too dark, Venom is just an indulgence in even more dark, and Deadpool is clever, true to form, but too vulgar for me, finally. I get their target audience. I'm not it. Good luck.

    • by irving47 ( 73147 )

      Joker? No thanks.
      Venom 3? Probably funny. will probably see it.
      Deadpool 3? Only thing I'm hopeful will be good and see if Disney can pull a crowbar out of their ass long enough to make some money.

  • Would making these movies more faithful to the way the characters are portrayed in the original comics help matters?

  • Super hero movies are for old people. Why would young people be interested in the tired, worn out tropes of comicbook heros when they could watch a movie about Mario?
    • It depends on what you mean by "tropes".

      If "tropes" means genres, then no, the tropes will never wear out.

      There is a legacy of pop fiction beginning with the penny dreadfuls in England, through the dime novels in America, then the pulps, the comics, then the paperbacks, then modern graphic novels and video games. The same genres prevail in all of them - romance, frontier adventure, foreign adventure, crime-detectives, science fiction and future, cult of the hero, hero-in-disguise, et al. The tropes never

      • Good point. Mario isn't really any different from the super heros. But I would love to watch Mario 2, but I'd probably fall asleep in the middle of Aquaman. Part of the issue is that comics are way to expensive for young people to buy so not only are movies based on them going to be less interesting to people under 45 but the community around comics and superheros is going to keep getting older, although I'm sure there's tons of money to be made for many decades. Maybe the way for young people to get into s
  • Genres come and go. The superhero genre has run its course. Poor writing hasn't helped. M-She-U, anybody? Ugh!

    Give people something entertaining and they'll pay to watch it. Barbie and Oppenheimer weren't superhero movies. Nor was The Eras Tour. All three made a bundle.

    ...laura

  • by paul_engr ( 6280294 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @03:05PM (#64103589)
    I'm glad that these stupid, formulaic, plotless shovelware franchise superhero movies are finally getting their reckoning.
  • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @03:25PM (#64103631)

    Jason Momoa campaigned against the Thirty Meter Telescope. That is enough for me a get schadenfreude whenever shit fucks up for him.

  • This is what I want...
    "a season" of movies that run parallel to each other, followed by a collab event, and then a conclusion film.

    So let's say, Superman, Batman, Supergirl, Wonder Woman and a few others all have a film. Just a "Origin" film that concludes with jailing/sealing or defeat of the big-bad. All of these films take place in the same few months.

    Then there is one, and ONLY one film where these group gets together. Arguably, the villains of the DC comics are more interesting than the Heroes. I'd say

  • So many movies; they are like episodes in a TV show now. And they are surprised no one wants to go to the theater to watch each episode?
  • They left out his trusty comrade and Ward -- FINLAD!
  • by az-saguaro ( 1231754 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @03:45PM (#64103669)

    A bit of history for those interested:

    In the latter 1800's, popular periodical fiction in the U.S. was the "dime novels", derived in spirit from England's penny dreadfuls. Circa 1900, color printing became a reality, Sunday "funnies" became popular, and burgeoning working and urban classes created a demand for entertaining reading material on a budget. The dimes forked into two media, the pulps and the comics.

    The pulps were the creation of publishing impresario Frank Munsey (1854-1925). Having had trials and tribulations in early publishing efforts, he had insights that revolutionized the magazine industry. By 1900, Munsey's had the highest circulation of any magazine in the world. But, he went a step further with the Argosy Magazine which debuted in 1896. His genius realized that working class people with modest discretionary cash did not buy quality books for their libraries. They wanted throwaway literature for incidental entertainment that was easy and fun to read without philosophy, politics, or pretentiousness, issued regularly like the dimes. He already knew that 25 cents an issue was too high, that 10 cents worked, but to be profitable, he would need high circulation printed cheaply without middlemen. He stated “Good writing is as common as clam shells, while good stories are as rare as statesmanship.” For his working class customers, the story was the value, not the tangible paper and ink. So, he printed on the cheapest pulp paper he could buy, sold direct to newsstands without distributors, and hired the best writers to contribute first rate stories. Some of America's finest writers contributed to the pulps, even if under pseudonyms. For 10 cents, people got hours worth of top notch entertainment, and millions of people were spending that dime. The pulps were a cultural and profitable phenomenon until the mid 1950's.

    The comics likewise derived from the dimes, the picture dimes. They were like the pulps in spirit, but they were more oriented toward kids, and they used an illustrative approach to story telling. They also began circa 1900. At first, they were basically just the Sunday funnies cartoons bound into a throwaway magazine. But, they gradually transformed into graphical picture “novels” telling an original novella style story in each issue. What we now recognize as the true comics were developed around a theme or hero franchise beginning 1938 with DC Comics publishing Jerome Siegal's (writer) and Joseph Shuster's (artist) Superman. The next year, the format extended to crime noir and detective genres with Batman. Comic books rapidly became a robust industry and cornerstone of popular culture.

    In 1980 or 1990, CGI special effects were "Wow". Now, they are taken for granted. Audiences have lost interest in pointless computer special effects, bored and burnt out. The classic comic book franchises had art staffs of just a few talented people turning out inspiring and beloved drawings and stories. Now, they have credits listing 100's or 1000's of digital "artist" drones who shaded a few polygons then cut-paste the same sprite 5000 times for a thoroughly uninspiring result. They make sound and action move so fast and loud that the action cannot be understood and the dialogue cannot be heard. Characters are dumbed down by the toy marketing department, and the stories-by-committee are all derivative and boring. No one cares anymore - it seems to me - but so it would seem for many as told in the low revenue numbers. I suspect that many people go to see their favorite franchise hoping for the best, but are then disappointed, which drives viewership even lower on the next release.

    The franchise idiots at the big studios could take a lesson from their humble origins. If they made a simpler movie with fewer special effects and less pointless spectacle, but with a great story, great acting, perhaps ideally with new or unknown actors, made the scenes and story understandable - and, not to belabor the point, but had original great

    • The fight scenes in movies are so drawn out and predictable that I always fast forward them. If I see something interesting that breaks up the "I hit you, you hit me, I hit you even harder" monotony I'll watch it then go back to the fast forwarding.

      • Yeah especially in the superhero genre the big CGI set pieces are almost exhausting to watch, it's too much the worst offender being anything in the Snyder DC universe.

        Would any of the big franchise comic (MCU, DCU) book movies make a top 10 of action movies? Top 20? Maybe "Winter Soldier" is the closest I can think of? I don't think any of them are better than say "The Dark Knight". They have their cool sequences but for me it all blends together into a mishmash of noise.

        To me for all the billions of doll

      • If you're doing that, then what's left? Are you watching comic book movies for the dialog?

    • you forget that droves of families shove an ipad in their kids face so they can not have to talk to them and then take them on adventures like every single one of these stupid marvel movies and they are so dumb down at this point that thats all they know. good film is now like eating broccoli for them but they are forced fed the chicken nuggets on the kids menu
  • That aren't just eye candy, we need variety
  • by Hoi Polloi ( 522990 ) on Sunday December 24, 2023 @04:19PM (#64103741) Journal

    Person with superpowers, bad guys with superpowers, they have big CGI fights where they get smashed into walls and ledges, rockets blow up, rinse and repeat. There must be a giant computer cranking these out now.

  • WATER movies

    Highest grossing Hollywood movie of all time - Water movie: AVATAR

  • Who couldn't see this coming. DC is way too invested not changing course.
    • by aergern ( 127031 )

      This was the last movie in Snyder's lame duck DCEU ... Gunn is rebooting the whole thing so yeah, that's called a change of direction. DC has never been invested in much of anything. They've always bumblefuck through.

  • We told you we didn't want to see Amber Heard in this. You HEARing us now?

  • So what you all are saying is Amber Hurd shit the bed... again?!

    Who would have thunk it!!!! :P
  • They pushed back the release date so it wouldn't be so close in the headlines to Amber Heard's court loss for lying about who was the domestic abuser in her relationship (no easy feat, given she went so far as to wear fake bruises and give TMZ a very misleadingly edited video; and defamation cases by public figures are a massive uphill battle in the US)... and there's pretty solid reason to think the studio was bankrolling her massive post-trial PR blitz of making shit up about why she lost given the judgem
  • The costume design for Mera. Everything else was forgettable. And nobody views that actress the same now.

  • Who the the hell greenlighted Aquaman movies?

  • the headline I saw:
    "Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom floats to top of box office but flounders"

    Sounds fishy to me..

"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody

Working...