The Gist

• Amazon MGM and Mattel’s “Masters of the Universe” is looking bleak in early box-office projections.

• It raises questions about the kinds of big-budget gambles both companies want to be taking.

• The movie comes at a time when younger audiences are screaming loud and clear about what they’re interested in.

When “Barbie” debuted in 2023 to overwhelming acclaim — box office, critical reception, Oscar nominations — it signaled that toy maker Mattel was about to get serious about movies.

Last year, Mattel announced that “The Bear” star Ayo Edebiri was writing “Barney,” and that “Wicked” filmmaker Jon M. Chu would direct “Hot Wheels.” To put a finer point on it, the company also combined its movie and TV studios to form Mattel Studios.

In that time, Amazon has also gotten more serious about theatrical movies. At CinemaCon in Vegas in April, it vowed to release 15 movies a year in theaters. This year, Amazon MGM Studios has already released “Mercy,” “Melania,” “Crime 101,” “The Sheep Detectives,” and its crown jewel, “Project Hail Mary.”

But this weekend will provide some early lessons (or warnings) for both Amazon and Mattel’s movie ambitions.

Amazon MGM is releasing “Masters of the Universe,” directed by “Bumblebee” filmmaker Travis Knight and based on the Mattel ‘80s toy line and cartoons. I saw it last night, and it’s a pretty baffling movie, even for someone familiar with the source material. But my own personal thoughts aside, warning lights are already going off for the movie, which reportedly cost $200 million to make.

“Scary Movie 6,” also opening this weekend, earned $23 million over Thursday and Friday in early numbers, while “Masters of the Universe” made just over $12 million. Friend of the newsletter Shawn Robbins at Box Office Theory had projected the former to make at least $50 million on the weekend, and the latter to gross about $30 million. I would be comfortable taking the over and under, respectively.

“Masters” is also contending with horror holdovers “Backrooms” and “Obsession.” And it got a B CinemaScore grade, which isn’t bad, but isn’t a great result for such an expensive blockbuster that will need good word-of-mouth (“Obsession” got an A-, rare for a horror movie, indicating how its such a crowd pleaser).

A quick side note: Hasbro must be looking at this weekend’s box office and jumping with joy that it doesn’t have to directly worry about this stuff anymore. It got out of the movie business and didn’t look back, instead going all in on gaming and digital experiences like an AI studio (which the Hollywood trades wrote about this week, but I broke nine months ago).

I don’t like to kick a movie while it’s down, and I want “Masters” to succeed; I largely think it’s unfair when a movie is painted as a failure so early. But the signs are hard to ignore: This may not end well.

Fortunately, we live in a world where movies can easily find a second life on streaming, and I’m sure Amazon will give this a big push when it does arrive on Prime Video. Even “flops” like “Crime 101” and “Mercy” found an audience. But the movie’s box office will undoubtedly raise questions for both Amazon and Mattel about what does and doesn’t work in theaters, and how much they really want to be investing in big-budget gambles like this.

After years of facing a bit of an identity crisis, Amazon’s TV strategy has developed into what I previously called “Dude TV.” It includes “Fallout,” “The Boys,” “Invincible,” “Reacher,” “Jack Ryan,” etc. You know, shows about dudes being dudes based on pre-existing IP like games and comics and airplane books that mainly appeal to men. There is the occasional exception, like “The Summer I Turned Pretty” and more recently “Off Campus.” But for the most part, Prime Video has figured out its identity.

Amazon MGM is still figuring that out (at least until the next James Bond comes out), but it at least knows what it’s not, and that’s the kind of small “prestige” dramas that Amazon was making when it was first testing out theaters and before it bought MGM. Now, its best movies are what I’d say are “friendly crowd pleasers,” like “Project Hail Mary” and “The Sheep Detectives.” “Masters of the Universe” could also fall into that bucket, and also overlaps with the “Dude” content on Prime Video, so I could understand the temptation on their part.

The only problem is that not many people seem to care.

This isn’t a kids movie; it easily could have been, but instead it’s purposely winking at a Gen X/older Millennial audience that is familiar with the source material and in on the joke. And in that sense, it doesn’t appeal to Gen Z either, which as I’ve written about before — and as “Obsession” and “Backrooms” are solidifying — are the generation most willing to go to the movies. At a time when that audience is quite obviously thirsting for original genre films or movies based on fresh IP they love (games, anime, etc), “Masters of the Universe” lands with a massive thud.

Further, when “Barbie” grossed over $1 billion, it reminded Hollywood — which had been obsessed with superhero movies for a decade-plus — that women not only go to the movies, too, but they will go in droves. Since then, “Wicked,” “It Ends With Us,” “The Housemaid,” “The Devil Wears Prada 2,” and more have backed that up.

For Mattel, and Hollywood at large, “Masters of the Universe” will carry no such enlightenment. And it makes me wonder about their future projects.

A24’s “Barney,” for instance, sounds like it will be a meta-commentary on the plight of millennials who grew up on the show. Mattel production exec Kevin McKeon has called it “surrealistic” and “a play for adults.” It seems in the vein of “Barbie,” and even “Masters of the Universe,” which also leans into a sort of meta-narrative about the audience’s perceptions of the property.

But at a certain point, millennials may just want to take their kids to a kid-friendly “Barney” movie?

What I’m into right now

• Yes, “Backrooms” lives up to the hype, and now I’m tempted to go down the YouTube rabbit hole.

• The James Bond video game “007 First Light” is a ton of fun, and another example of how games can nurture movie IP.

Beyond the Traverse

🧙‍♀️ Get ready for the YouTube filmmaker-horror IP pipeline: With “Obsession” director Curry Barker making a “Texas Chainsaw” movie, Dylan Clark is set to tackle a new “Blair Witch.”

📺 The New York Times has a new profile of Netflix’s film chief Dan Lin titled “Netflix is done coddling Hollywood,” where he says they won’t work with filmmakers who want theatrical. I don’t buy it.

🎥 Zack Snyder is directing a remake of “Escape from New York.” No thank you!

The Gist

• “Obsession” and “Backrooms” are both low-budget horror movie hits from YouTube filmmakers.

• But their success is about more than just the YouTube effect.

• They once again show how young people are keeping the movie industry afloat, but they aren’t as interested in the stuff Hollywood had been making in the 2010s.

Something peculiar is happening in the movie business right now.

“Obsession,” made for under $1 million, has crossed $100 million worldwide and is set to pass that milestone very soon domestically (read my review). This week, it topped “The Mandalorian and Grogu” at the box office on Wednesday and Thursday, despite being in theaters a week longer.

“Backrooms,” another horror-thriller filmed on a small budget of around $10 million, is set to become A24’s biggest opening ever this weekend; after grossing nearly $40 million over Thursday previews and Friday, it could crack $80 million through Sunday (on par with what Mando and Grogu earned in its first weekend).

Both were directed by 20-somethings who grew a following on YouTube.

“Obsession” director Curry Barker’s sketch comedy channel, that’s a bad idea, has over 1 million subscribers. His 2024 hour-long found-footage horror film “Milk and Serial” has nearly 3 million views.

“Backrooms” filmmaker Kane Parsons has over 3 million subscribers on his channel Kane Pixels, where the idea of “Backrooms” originated; on a quick scroll of his channel, those videos have as “few” as 3 million views and as many as 80 million.

Something similar happened earlier this year with “Iron Lung,” a horror movie based on a video game that was directed, self-financed, and self-released by the YouTuber known as Markiplier. It was more niche, and wasn’t the kind of breakout hit that the other movies are. But it managed to gross $50 million without any studio backing or marketing and on a $3 million budget, buoyed mostly by the director’s own online fans.

So yes, the YouTube effect is real. These filmmakers accumulated a large audience that are clearly willing to pay for tickets to see their new movies.

But that’s not the whole story.

When “Obsession” grossed more in its second weekend than its first, that’s not merely the YouTube effect. That’s positive word-of-mouth on a level rarely seen, but also essential to the movie business. It received an A- grade from CinemaScore, which is unheard of for a horror movie (it’s a genre that can be polarizing, and A grades are more typical for tentpole, four-quadrant blockbusters; Mando and Grogu also got an A-). Only a handful of horror movies this century have gotten that high a grade, and they include “Get Out,” “A Quite Place Part II,” and “The Conjuring.”

When “Backrooms” gets close to $80 million this weekend, that’s not just the YouTube effect. That’s also a smart marketing strategy by a smart movie studio (some old rules still apply). And while “Backrooms” has a B- CinemaScore grade, so word-of-mouth may not be as strong, it’s not as polarizing as some horror movies.

They are also, most importantly, both reflections of how young people do like going to the movies when there is stuff in theaters that entices them (a whopping 80% of the opening day audience for “Obsession” was under 35, driven by younger millennials and Gen Z).

And that’s not new, even if the Hollywood press treats it as such every time this happens. A National Research Group study early last year found that Gen Alpha and Gen Z like going to the movies more than other age groups; a year later, the trades acted like it was buried treasure when Fandango released similar stats this April.

At any rate, this decade has reshaped what we thought we knew; I’ve written at length about how the old guard of movie franchises that ruled the 2010s are no longer as reliable as they once were. Meanwhile, some of the biggest movies of the 2020s — like “A Minecraft Movie” and “Barbie” — have been driven by young crowds (For the former, nearly the entire opening weekend audience was under 25).

Meanwhile, Gen Alpha’s favorite franchises are mostly video games, according to that NRG study I mentioned earlier. Eleven of the top 20 were game IP or platforms, including the top 5.

Young people now just like different stuff than what Hollywood had been making for decades. And whether it’s buzzy new horror movies or video games or, lest we forget, anime, when they show up they really show up. Remember when the anime movie “Demon Slayer: Infinity Castle” made $70 million in its opening weekend in the US last year?

There may not be enough of that stuff yet to fill the gap that the decline of superhero box office has left cinemas, but there are signs that Hollywood at least seems to be wisening up to this new dynamic. Then again, as William Goldman once wrote, “nobody knows anything.”

No What I’m Into Right Now or Beyond the Traverse today. I’ll be back soon with another post. Thanks for reading.

The Gist

• “The Mandalorian and Grogu” is a shockingly self-contained and low-stakes movie. Is that good enough for Star Wars?

• After years of TV shows and franchise mismanagement, it feels like a miracle that a Star Wars movie is in the wild again.

• And audiences seem to enjoy it, with an A- CinemaScore grade; it’s a movie for a new generation of fans.

Two years ago, I wrote a piece titled “Disney does not want Star Trek,” arguing that — after canceling “The Acolyte” — Disney had realized that it had essentially turned one of its most prestige and popular film franchises, Star Wars, into a TV franchise. As much as the company had wanted to juice its streaming business, it also wanted to get Star Wars back to its cinematic roots (i.e. back on track) or risk continued diminished returns on the small screen.

“Disney is not in the business of diminishing returns, especially for one of its most prized brands,” I wrote. “But Star Wars, one of the biggest movie franchises of all time that has generated billions of dollars in box-office sales, is now essentially a TV franchise more akin to Star Trek. There’s nothing wrong with Star Trek, but that’s not what Star Wars is. And that’s not what Disney wants.”

So it’s funny that the latest Star Wars movie, “The Mandalorian and Grogu” — the franchise’s return to the big screen after seven years — reminded me of Star Trek.

Not in plot or settings or characters or tone. Star Wars and Star Trek are still very different in those regards. But it reminded me that there have been at least 10 seasons of live-action Star Wars TV between this movie and the last one in 2019, “The Rise of Skywalker,” plus a bevy of animated shows. Some of those shows, like “Obi-Wan Kenobi” and “The Book of Boba Fett” probably would have made for better movies, and were originally conceived as such. But Disney’s streaming strategy, and “Solo” flopping at the box office, led to a pivot.

Now “The Mandalorian and Grogu” is the first theatrical movie adapted from a TV series that originated on a streaming service; the original “Star Trek” series also made the leap to cinemas, as did the crew of “Next Generation.”

So even as Disney winds down its Star Wars TV output, the franchise’s return to cinemas still has TV roots. For young fans who may have been kids or teens when “The Mandalorian” premiered, and are now in their teens or early 20s, the show may have been their first or most impactful entry into Star Wars. To them, THIS is Star Wars. To them, Star Wars might be more of a TV franchise than a movie one. And like it or not, that’s who this movie is primarily catering to.

So I ask: What’s a Star Wars movie now? If you had asked me seven years ago, after the abysmal “Rise of Skywalker” and “The Mandalorian” had started streaming, I would have told you the future of the franchise was Mando. And in some ways I would have been right. “The Mandalorian and Grogu” is the first Star Wars movie devoid of any Skywalker Saga connection. “Rogue One” was essentially a “New Hope” prequel, and “Solo” had its roots in the original trilogy.

Sure, the show dove into some sequel trilogy stuff, trying to retroactively make sense of how the Emperor was cloned. But the movie doesn’t get into any of that. It’s a purely standalone story. You probably don’t even really need to have seen the show to “get” it. And the stakes are shockingly low.

A Star Wars movie used to be an EVENT. “The Mandalorian and Grogu” feels less like an event and more of a self-contained fun family outing to the movies. More of an MCU solo superhero movie than an Avengers or Civil War. After years of franchise mismanagement and false starts, it seems like a miracle that a Star Wars movie is even in the wild. Is that good enough? Is that acceptable to fans?

It may be too early to tell exactly, but in my mind, I’m fine with Mando and Grogu existing in their own little pocket of the franchise. As I write in my Letterboxd review of the movie, I was always more of a fan of the adventure-of-the-week aspect of the show more than the cloning stuff; I was fine with subtle nods to the latter or when it was backgrounded, but the show got weighted down by it when it came to the foreground, like in season three (you can see my episode ranking for how much I really don’t like the third season). So I was completely okay with “The Mandalorian and Grogu” being far removed from any of that.

As for the fans, the box office in its opening this weekend won’t live up to previous entries in the franchise, but it doesn’t necessarily need to. At around a $150 million production budget give or take, it’s less expensive than the Saga films or even the spinoff movies. Comscore projects it to earn $165 million over the four-day holiday weekend, including $102 million domestically. Coming into the weekend, there were worrisome projections that the movie could only earn around $80 million for the four days, so I’d call this a win.

Remember, it may be a Star Wars movie, but it’s also a kids movie based on a TV show.

And audiences seem to really enjoy it. It received an A- CinemaScore grade, which surveys moviegoers on opening night, making it a far better and real reflection of audience consensus compared to something like Rotten Tomatoes user scores. As a reminder, that’s better than “The Rise of Skywalker,” which got a B+ and is the only Star Wars movie to get below an A-level grade (not counting the Clone Wars movie). It basically has the next two weeks to itself with little competition save for holdovers with long legs, so word of mouth could carry it even past that as kids start to get out of school for the summer. I imagine it will surpass “Solo’s” $393 million global box office.

Yes, the reviews have been subpar (but lean positive) at a 62% RT critic score. And there’s a lot of social media and Letterboxd takes trashing the movie. But I remember the prequels were panned when they came out too — for their cheesy dialogue, for their acting, for the visuals — and they have now been reclaimed by a large section of the fandom.

So to the question of “what do fans want out of a Star Wars movie?” The answer is: They don’t actually know.

But they won’t have to wait long for the next one: “Star Wars: Starfighter,” starring Ryan Gosling and directed by Shawn Levy, hits theaters next year.

What I’m into right now

• I was wowed by “Obsession,” the latest micro-drama horror movie, and can’t stop thinking about it. The word of mouth is strong: It was up 30% at the box office this weekend. It might be my favorite movie of the year so far. Read my Letterboxd review.

• I also really enjoyed “The Sheep Detectives,” a sentence I never though I’d write when I first saw the trailer. But it’s a lovely and surprisingly poignant family comedy (with sheep) that is way better than what you’d expect.

• The final season of “Hacks” has featured some of its funniest moments. I’m sad it’s ending this week, but I know they’ll land the plane with a stellar finale.

• I finally rolled credits on “Pokemon Pokopia” today. It will be hard for any other game to top this as my game of the year, even GTA6.

Beyond the Traverse

💥 Marvel’s head of TV and animation was promoted to oversee comics as well.

• As I wrote recently, much of Marvel’s problems on the comics side has been their attachment to the film and TV business. So I don’t think this will help!

🎥 WSJ reports that IMAX has talked with entertainment companies about a sale. Not great!

Ahead of the new “Mandlorian and Grogu” movie, I rewatched all three seasons of “The Mandalorian” (as well as the last three episode of “The Book of Boba Fett”).

So naturally I needed to rank the episodes.

In cases where I didn’t have much to say about an episode, I added a brief episode description.

I’ll have more to say about the new movie and the state of Star Wars in a post I’ll be publishing soon.

But until then: Here’s my ranking:

24. The Convert (Season 3, Episode 3)

Directed by Lee Isaac Chung

For me, this is where Mando officially loses the plot. The episode is bookended by Mando and Bo-Katan fleeing imperials and Bo joining Mando’s sect. But the bulk of the episode follows Dr. Pershing on Coruscant, now part of the New Republic’s amnesty program for former agents of the Empire. The show seeded Sequel Trilogy stuff throughout, but this is the most glaring example, deviating from the title character in a way that awkwardly fits into the episode and the season’s larger narrative. Oh, and it’s boring. Yeah, we could buy that both Bo and Pershing are the “converts” if we wanted to feel better about the mashing of the two stories — but the execution is poor.

23. The Apostate (Season 3, Episode 1)

Directed by Rick Famuyiwa

Yeah, I really don’t care for season three. It’s clear from the season’s premiere that this was a different show, abandoning the adventure-of-the-week to have Mando bopping from place to place to set up the rest of the season’s storylines. Of course, this episode suffers from important events since season two happening in the Boba Fett show; at the end of the second season, Grogu is taken by Luke Skywalker. By the start of season three, he’s back with Mando. And there’s plenty of awkward dialogue to fill in the blanks for those who didn’t bother with The Book of Boba Fett. And I’m not a fan of Mando being so adamant about IG-11; we get that he doesn’t trust droids, but this seemed like a cheap attempt to remind us about IG, especially with what happens in the next episode.

22. The Gunslinger (Season 1, Episode 5)

Directed by Dave Filoni

Easily the weakest episode of the first season. Of course, this introduces Amy Sedaris’ Peli into the mix, and teases Boba Fett’s return. So it’s not all bad. But Jake Cannavale’s Toro is just a terribly annoying character.

21. The Foundling (Season 3, Episode 4)

Directed by Carl Weathers

The one where Jar Jar Binks actor Ahmed Best plays a Jedi that rescues Grogu from Order 66 in an armor-making flashback sequence. This is another episode where the title could refer to two characters (Grogu and a foundling that the Mandos have to rescue from giant bird creatures). I’m not necessarily as big a fan as some of mixing Jedi stuff with my Mandalorian stuff, so the Grogu bit in this episode doesn’t wow me. And this is where this season really starts to be a Mando and Bo/Mando sect show, and I prefer Din as a lone wolf.

20. Guns for Hire (Season 3, Episode 6)

Directed by Bryce Dallas Howard

Yeah, the Lizzo and Jack Black stuff isn’t great. But I do rather enjoy the noir and droid stuff that reminds me a bit of Attack of the Clones. Unfortunately, there’s not enough of it.

19. The Pirate (Season 3, Episode 5)

Directed by Peter Ramsey

The battle on Nevarro is a lot of fun and shot well, but it takes foreevveeerrr for Mando to actually appear in this episode, with the beginning dedicated to Captain Teva trying to recruit the New Republic’s help to defend Nevarro against the pirates. A lot of the New Republic stuff in season three is quite egregious; it’s probably just leftover from the canned “Rangers of the New Republic” series, and it shows.

18. The Prisoner (Season 1, Episode 6)

Directed by Rick Famuyiwa

What’s it about: Mando’s latest job is to spring a prisoner from a New Republic prison, but is betrayed.

17. The Passenger (Season 2, Episode 2)

Directed by Peyton Reed

What’s it about: Mando has to escort an amphibious (fish-like?) passenger, but crash lands on a snowy planet after a run-in with New Republic pilots.

16. The Child (Season 1, Episode 2)

Directed by Rick Famuyiwa

What’s it about: Mando recruits the help of Kuiil after Jawas steal parts of his ship.

15. The Believer (Season 2, Episode 7)

Directed by Rick Famuyiwa

Bill Burr’s return here is a lot of fun; I think this would be higher if I wasn’t a tad annoyed with how Mando is forced to take his helmet off; in the context of the episode, the weight of the moment is a bit undone when Burr’s Mayfield “rescues” him, after he said he couldn’t enter that room out of fear the superior officer would recognize him.

14. The Return (Season 3, Episode 8)

Directed by Rick Famuyiwa

This season three finale doesn’t pack the punch that the show’s previous two finales did, mostly because it’s a direct continuation of the prior episode, which I enjoy a lot more. As a finale, it didn’t do enough to top that episode’s climax.

13. Sanctuary (Season 3, Episode 4)

Directed by Bryce Dallas Howard

The episode that introduces Cara Dune. Yeah, Gina Carano is a terrible actress, but I enjoy this episode as the first in the series that really fulfilled the “Mando and friends”/ “adventure of the week” promise. The previous three episodes are very much tied together; here, we get Mando in a new location, meeting a new ally, solving a new problem and helping other people in need.

12. The Mines of Mandalore (Season 3, Episode 2)

Directed by Rachel Morrison

What’s it about: Mando travels to Mandalore to bathe in the Living Waters (with a droid that’s not IG), but sends Grogu for Bo-Katan for help after he’s captured.

11. The Sin (Season 1, Episode 3)

Directed by Deborah Chow

What’s it about: Mando has a change of heart and rescues Grogu, putting him in the crosshairs of local mercenaries.

10. The Heiress (Season 2, Episode 3)

Directed by Bryce Dallas Howard

What’s it about: Mando helps Bo-Katan in exchange for info about where to find a Jedi.

9. The Spies (Season 3, Episode 7)

Directed by Rick Famuyiwa

The highlight of season three is effectively a part one of the season finale, kicking off with a menacing Moff Gideon, who had been teased to have never made it to his trial all season, and ending with a thrilling shoot out between the Mandalorians and Moff’s troops after it’s revealed he’s been using Mandalore as an Imperial base. The third season in a row of Moff as the bad guy could have felt like old news, but his plan to sync the best parts of Jedi and Mandalorians to create his own army is interesting, and his Beskar armor is sick.

8. The Siege (Season 2, Episode 4)

Directed by Carl Weathers

What’s it about: Mando and Cara Dune agree to help Greef Karga destroy an Imperial base on Nevarro in the hopes of permanently freeing the planet; what was thought to be a military base turns out to be a lab, shedding more light on Moff Gideon’s cloning plans.

7. The Mandalorian (Season 1, Episode 1)

Directed by Dave Filoni

The series premiere is the perfect introduction to Mando: his personality, his mercenary world, and his arsenal. And the ending, introducing Grogu (then known as “baby Yoda” to fans), felt really special. This is what I thought the future of Star Wars would be when it premiered (and in a way, I was right; though it’s hard to say after this weekend).

6. The Jedi (Season 2, Episode 5)

Directed by Dave Filoni

Most fans might have this even higher, but I have no emotional connection to Ahsoka as a character; I never watched The Clone Wars and I found her solo series awfully boring. And as I said further up, I prefer the Mandalorian stuff to the Jedi stuff in this show. But this episode is still an important one, filling in gaps about Grogu, and I dig the homages to samurai cinema, which is classic Star Wars.

5. The Reckoning (Season 1, Episode 7)

Directed by Deborah Chow

Moff Gideon’s monologue alone puts it this high up.

4. The Rescue (Season 2, Episode 8)

Directed by Peyton Reed

Like I’ve said, I prefer this show when it doesn’t get mixed up too heavily with Jedi stuff, which is the only reason it’s not higher (I feel like most fans would probably rank this number 1). But it’s still an exceptional episode, with Luke’s appearance living up to the promise of the season; an emotional good-bye between Mando and Grogu (that’s quickly undone by The book of Boba Fett); and an epic fight between Mando and Moff.

3. The Tragedy (Season 2, Episode 6)

Directed by Robert Rodriguez

Boba Fett! Even though his solo series would be abysmal, his return here was truly exciting.

2. The Marshal (Season 2, Episode 1)

Directed by Jon Favreau

The only episode that creator Jon Favreau directed, this is classic Mando: Adventure of the week, while still tying into the larger story. Mando meets a new ally and is recruited into helping a group of people fend off a sizable threat. Not to mention it’s a great showcase for Timothy Olyphant as Marshal Cobb Vanth (I’m still upset about the way he was killed off in the Boba Fett series).

1. Redemption (Season 1, Episode 8)

Directed by Taika Waititi

Peak Mandalorian. The season one finale is equal parts thrilling, action-packed, and hilarious, with Waititi implementing humor we hadn’t seen in the show before (and didn’t after?) that still didn’t feel out of place. Exquisitely directed, with high stakes, and a satisfying payoff that also left you wanting the next season as soon as possible.

The Gist

• From the reaction to the new “Resident Evil” trailer to the hoopla over the “Mario” and “Michael” reviews, media literacy is dead.

• Fandom has become an engine of mass hysteria, which could set a dangerous precedent for the future of IP-based movies.

• Welcome to my Ted Talk.

Zach Cregger, the director of “Weapons” and “Barbarian,” has a new horror movie coming out this year, and the first teaser trailer dropped this week. Like his other movies, it looks excellent, with a fine-tuned sense of dread and chaos.

It’s also a “Resident Evil” movie.

That fact set the fandom ablaze this week, with many, at least based on my social feeds, lambasting the movie as what could be summed up as RENO (“Resident Evil in name only”). Never mind that Cregger has made two of the best horror movies in recent years or that he’s a fan of the games. Never mind that both of said movies featured a mid-way twist that upended all expectations for what we thought they would be, which would lead me to believe he’s not going to show all of his cards this time either. “Fans” of this material are still blowing a gasket.

I recently wrote about how the three-decade-old game franchise has endured, and even increased, in popularity. What I didn’t know then was how insufferable its fandom could be. I’ve read comics for almost that same amount of time, and seen a bevy of comic-book movies where respected filmmakers have put their own spin on the material. As gaming starts to take over Hollywood, fans are going to have to get used to that.

But fandom in general is going through a bit of a tailspin right now. I also recently wrote about how Mario fans (oh, another gaming franchise) were up in arms over the supposed chasm between critics ratings and audience consensus for “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” The same thing is happening with Michael Jackson fans over the “Michael” movie.

Never mind that Rotten Tomatoes is a terrible system/aggregator that nobody should be putting that much faith in, and that critical consensus for “Mario Galaxy” was actually in line with that of audiences (people like the first movie better). Never mind that “Michael” is not the movie that even the filmmakers wanted to make, and was haphazardly reshot after the third act had to be thrown out over a Jackson settlement with one of his accusers; critics know this, and I (probably naively) don’t think it’s much to ask that audiences know it too — or are at least open to the idea that this is a crude piece of celebrity propaganda initially designed to rehabilitate someone’s image that, by the looks of the box office, didn’t actually need to be rehabilitated.

But culture and the arts are under attack from a political machine that just wants to dumb us all down, aided and abetted by algorithms and AI. So it’s not shocking that media literacy is dead. And it’s turning fandom into an engine of mass hysteria, even more so than usual. One could say this has been a long time coming, as the culture war of the last decade amplified the worst corners of fandoms that “review bombed” the likes of “The Last Jedi,” “Black Panther,” “Captain Marvel,” and more.

But now it’s less about the culture war and more about what fans feel is owed to them. At a time when consumers probably have more power over studio decisions than ever before (and when fan “influencers” are getting invited to CinemaCon), it could set a dangerous precedent for the future of movies and TV, where everything is de-risked — not just politically, but creatively. It’s one thing to be respectful of source material; it’s another to cave to the worst, most uncurious people on the internet.

And it’s not just this kind of mentality that’s settling in with hardcore fans of specific IP. Nobody seems to know how to watch movies anymore. Sure, you can argue there’s no “right” way to watch something. But there appears to be a phenomenon happening, for instance, where viewers are mistaking a rotten character’s actions as an endorsement by that film or filmmaker. Take “One Battle After Another.” A lot of people were so disgusted by Sean Penn’s character that they didn’t like the movie, or didn’t think he even deserved the Oscar. Never mind that villains like that have a storied history of winning in that same category. But are people really missing the point of the movie that much? (Yeah, it also could have been a lot of embellishment by “Sinners” super fans, too.)

Anyway, maybe I’m online too much. But all I’m asking is that people just be smarter about the content they’re consuming. Rant over.

What I’m into right now

• I finally caught up on the new season of “The Pitt” (I wanted to binge it) and it’s excellent. This is one of the few shows that I think benefits from a binge-watch, given the real-time nature

• I’m heavily enjoying my Switch 2, which I wrote in the last edition about finally getting. I’ve been investing the most time in “Pokopia.”

Beyond the Traverse

👿 Add it to the Marvel math: “Daredevil: Born Again” season two is reportedly down around 50% from the first season’s viewership, according to Luminate data.

✈️ Paramount says that “Top Gun 3” is happening with Tom Cruise and producer Jerry Bruckheimer returning.

🐎 Sony is developing a Django and Zorro crossover movie.

The Gist

• Alamo Drafthouse Cinema is alienating its most loyal customers, including me, with unnecessary changes.

• I’ve canceled my Season Pass membership and won’t be returning any time soon.

• In 2024, Sony bought the dine-in theater chain.

CinemaCon, the annual Vegas conference where movie studios show off their film slates to theater owners, starts this week. So I thought I’d focus on a studio-owned theater chain today.

Alamo Drafthouse Cinema, a popular dine-in theater chain owned by Sony, has cultivated a loyal customer base for its strict (at least on paper) rules on theater etiquette. No late arrivals. No phone use or talking. The paper and pen they provided you wasn’t just for ordering food, but you could also flag any concerns with impolite guests. They said that if you got more than one warning, you’d be kicked out. I never saw it happen, but I liked the idea of it.

For a frequent moviegoer like myself in New York City, it was that stuff that appealed to me. I had an Alamo Season Pass, where you paid $30-$40 a month and could see a movie a day. Even if you saw two movies a month, it was worth it. I had recently upgraded to the “All-In” Season Pass, which got me 10% off food and I had even added an extra pass to my account for my wife, who often went with me.

If you noticed that all of that was in the past tense, it’s because I just canceled my Season Pass and won’t be going to Alamo Drafthouse any time soon.

For background: Alamo recently introduced changes that are alienating its most loyal customers. Gone are the physical menus and in are QR codes at each table. Not only are you forced to order on your phone and input your payment info, but you are now forced to use your phone to order during the movie. Alamo realizes this seems a bit odd, so they’ve added a “P.S.” at the end of their usual pre-movie spiel noting how ironic it is. Thanks.

I know this all sounds like first-world problems, and I’m privileged to have had the opportunity to go to Alamo theaters in the first place considering they aren’t exactly scattered all over the country. But they are abandoning everything that made them special in the first place. As a fan for a long time, it stings to have to write this.

I’ve stuck by Alamo far longer than I probably should have. On a personal level, I’ve had several episodes that disappointed me, any one of which would have made anyone else never go back to an Alamo cinema again.

Like the time we left something behind on accident at the Brooklyn location and by the time we got back to the lost-and-found, an employee had already taken it home (it was the next day, and we had called ahead of time; we got it back, though); or the time we were watching “Conclave” at the Manhattan location and the movie was interrupted by a DVD the staff was going to watch for a holiday party (it was sent to the wrong theater); or the time I was watching “Twisters” and the first few minutes of the movie had no sound.

All of this spoke to either inexperience or un-professionalism on the staff’s part, but I stuck with Alamo because I enjoyed the overall experience of their theaters, or at least the promise of that experience.

The new changes were the last straw, though. I saw them coming, but a part of me was hoping the company would change its mind. They had been testing the QR codes for a few months but still gave the option to use paper and pen during the movie. That test phase was an absolute nightmare, especially for those with the All In pass. I lost track of how many times I had to remind staff after I was charged to take the discount off (to be fair, they have rectified that now that QR codes are the only option, by inputting your account info. But they’ve messed up our order the last two times with the mobile ordering. The damage has been done).

The New York Alamo union had posted recently on their Instagram that they negotiated keeping the paper and pen option, so I was relieved. Yet, the last two times I went, the paper, pen, and menus were gone. I barely interacted with staff; the most I heard from them was while they were loudly talking in the back during the movie.

I went back to that Instagram post where a bunch of customers were commenting the same concerns. The union responded that things hadn’t gone how they expected. No shit.

Indiewire’s David Ehrlich put it this way in a recent piece: “The Absolute Hell of Watching a Movie at the Alamo Drafthouse in 2026.”

But the downfall of Alamo has actually been over a year in the making. In late 2024, Sony bought the theater chain. Granted, I don’t have inside knowledge of Sony’s decision-making, but it’s hard not to blame the studio for these changes. The acquisition was the first of its kind since the “Paramount Decrees” sunset in 2020, allowing studios to more easily buy a theater chain. But Sony is making a strong case for why movie studios shouldn’t own their own movie theaters. Ironically, Sony is the one major studio that doesn’t operate its own major streaming service, and claims to respect the theatrical experience.

Anyway, six months after Sony bought Alamo, it conducted layoffs. I reported at the time that the layoffs occurred amid bargaining of a new contract between Alamo and the NYC Alamo union, prompting an unfair labor complaint in New York.

It’s all seemed to go down hill since then. I truly hope Alamo will turn things around, but in the meantime, I’ve signed up for AMC Stubs A-List.

If you’re an Alamo staffer with something to share or a customer who canceled their membership and want to give your take, feel free to email me at travclark2@gmail.com or message me on Signal at travisclark.12

What I’m into right now

• I finally saw Pixar’s “Hoppers” (with my new AMC Stubs A-List membership) and it’s Pixar’s best in years. A surprising amount of horror homages and animal death?

• I’m caught up on “Euphoria” in time for tonight’s season three premiere. I’m excited, despite the terrible reviews.

• I pulled the trigger on a Switch 2 before prices inevitably increase, and dabbling with “Donkey Kong Bananza” and “Pokemon Pokopia.” Let me know what else I should play.

Beyond the Traverse

🎥 Disney is reportedly questioning the future of the “Avatar” franchise after “Fire and Ash” earned “only” $1.5 billion. Come on, let Big Jim make one more.

🎟️ Variety is exclaiming that “Gen Z goes to the movies!” as if they are learning about it for the first time. I’ve written about it before here and here.

☠️ The directors of the enormously entertaining “Final Destination: Bloodlines” are making a “Metal Gear Solid” movie.

🚓 Amazon has greenlit a “RoboCop” reboot for Prime Video.

The Gist

• The Rotten Tomatoes critic score for “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” has sparked debate over the gap between critical and audience consensus.

• But Rotten Tomatoes doesn’t capture any nuance, and is bad for the movie business.

• In reality, more critics liked the first movie better than the sequel — part of a trend that extends to the average moviegoer as well.

Another blockbuster movie has sparked another debate about the supposed chasm between professional critics and “what audiences or fans care about.”

“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” debuted over the weekend with a 41% Rotten Tomatoes critic score as well as $190 million over the five-day Easter box office. Obviously, the general audience consensus doesn’t quite align with the critical one, which has inspired a myriad of takes on social media from supposed film “community champions” on Threads, LinkedIn “thought leaders,” and everyone in between (I don’t know what’s going on on X and don’t need to).

This is not a new phenomenon, but it still boggles my mind that people who are apparently fans of movies don’t respect film criticism. Based on my social feeds, “Super Mario Galaxy” gets a pass on any critical analysis because it’s a “kids movie” “based on a video game” that “isn’t trying to be Citizen Kane.”

But that’s not what critics judge a movie on, and a lot of the criticism against the criticism sounds pretty disingenuous. When did we lower our expectations so much for kids movies? Or video games? Or thoughtful critique in general? People assume that film critics don’t have kids or don’t like kids movies or don’t play video games? Sure, some reviews can sound like crotchety old men. But I saw the movie, and I would align with the less-than-positive takes: As I wrote on my Letterboxd, it’s a disorienting and jarring experience made for the lowest of attention spans. Kids movies didn’t used to feel this hollow.

But yes, it’s also a fun movie that kids will like. Rotten Tomatoes scores don’t capture any such nuance, and if the bad outweighs the good for most critics, it will get a “rotten” score. The first “Super Mario Bros. Movie” has a 59% RT critics score, which means that 59% — over half — of critics actually liked it. But to RT, that’s “rotten.”

It’s bad for the movie business, but RT won’t fix it because it generates headlines, social media debate, and Substack posts.

In reality, rating aggregators across the board suggest that while “Galaxy” is beloved by those who saw it, it’s not as beloved as the first movie. The RT audience score is 89% compared to the first movie’s 95%; the Metacritic user score is a “generally favorable” 7.8 out of 10 compared to the first movie’s 8.1; on Letterboxd, it has a 3.0 score (that will probably drop) while the first movie has a 3.2; and its CinemaScore, which surveys moviegoers on opening night and is a better indicator than either of those, is an A-. Stellar, but a step down from the first movie’s A.

So yeah, audiences clearly like the movie, but I would look at the critics reviews as part of the above trend rather than some sort of offensive outlier: More critics liked the first movie than they did the sequel.

Even the weekend box office came in below what the first movie earned in its opening five days. This is a highly successful movie, but when all is said and done, will it be as successful as the first one? Maybe not.

But it is still bound to be one of the biggest movies of the year and likely the third-biggest animated sequel ever when all’s said and done, behind “Zootopia 2” and “Inside Out 2.” Critics be damned!

What I’m into right now

• I am finally watching HBO’s “Euphoria” for the first time ahead of its upcoming third season. This show is insane, to put it mildly, but I can’t look away.

• The physical media spring sales drained my wallet: Picked up Arrow’s “RoboCop” 4K; Criterion’s “Network” and “Killers of the Flower Moon”; and a bunch of stuff from Gruv.

Beyond the Traverse

💰 Zendaya and Robert Pattinson’s “The Drama” earned $14 million over the weekend, A24’s third-biggest opening ever.

🧙‍♀️ Zach Cregger is officially working on a script for a “Weapons” prequel about Aunt Gladys.

✍️ The WGA reached a deal with studios for a new four-year contract ahead of schedule.

⭐️ “Project Hail Mary” author Andy Weir apologized for calling Paramount+’s “Star Trek” shows “shit.”

The Gist

• “Project Hail Mary” is a box-office hit, and reports indicate Amazon is interested in a sequel.

• Unfortunately, some of the biggest “original” post-pandemic hits don’t automatically translate into franchises.

• Hollywood has to tread carefully between launching much-needed new franchises and respecting the original movie.

The bad news: Some of Hollywood’s most reliable franchises of the last two decades are drying up.

The good news: Some of the biggest post-pandemic hits have been “original” movies.

The more bad news: Those movies don’t automatically have sequels baked in.

“Project Hail Mary,” based on the hit book of the same name by Andy Weir, earned $140 million globally in its debut last weekend, including $80 million in the US. It was the biggest opening for an “original” movie (i.e. not a sequel or part of a larger media franchise) since “Oppenheimer” three years ago. This weekend, it sped past $300 million globally.

That kind of success raises the obvious question in Hollywood: Are we getting a sequel? According to The Hollywood Reporter, while no official conversations have started at Amazon MGM (which released the movie), it’s not out of the question; Weir has never written a sequel to one of his books, but has apparently toyed with ideas for a PHM followup.

The online chatter from fans about even the idea of a potential sequel has been mixed (by my observations, those who have only seen the movie want more Rocky; those who have read the book want the story to stop here, unless perhaps if Weir were to write a follow-up novel, which would not be any time soon). But for Amazon, it would be a no brainer as it builds out its movie studio and supposedly gets more serious about theatrical releases. And for the movie business, a growing studio willing to release more movies and build potential new franchises is some welcomed positivity as Warner Bros. is swallowed by Paramount.

But the whole thing raises thorny questions about the state of franchise filmmaking. The 2010s were dominated by cinematic universes and endless spinoffs. The franchises that prevailed in that era have waned, and audiences have shown that they crave newness at the cinema, from IP that’s new to the big screen, like “Barbie,” “Wicked,” or “F1” (yeah, I’m counting it here); adaptations of beloved works like “Project Hail Mary” and “It Ends With Us”; and truly original movies like “Sinners” or “Weapons.”

Of course, there are exceptions to that new world order, such as Marvel events like “Deadpool and Wolverine” or family-friendly sequel blockbusters like “Inside Out 2.” And video game adaptations are emerging as the new superhero movie. But for the most part, the old rules have not really applied in the 2020s.

Unfortunately, those “original” movies I mentioned don’t come pre-packaged as obvious franchise starters. And any potential sequels would likely take years to develop.

“Barbie” (also starring Gosling) was a phenomenon, but it would be hard to re-capture that magic, and director Greta Gerwig is busy with Narnia movies. There is a lot packed into “Sinners” that could lend itself to a larger world, but that all depends on Ryan Coogler’s appetite for that (he has previously said he “never thinks about” it). Apparently an “F1” sequel is in the works, but I’ll believe it when I see it.

Warner Bros. has reportedly already been talking with Zach Cregger about a “Weapons” prequel focused on Aunt Gladys, as he apparently wrote a section of the movie specifically about her but scrapped it. Amy Madigan just won an Oscar for the role, so she probably has a lot of leverage in if and how that gets made. “It Ends With Us” has a book sequel, but that movie has been plagued by enough drama to torch the whole thing.

Even the “Wicked” sequel performed modestly compared to its predecessor, and there are no obvious ways to expand that world unless Universal dove into the (much darker) books that loosely inspired the musical that inspired the movie. Not exactly the easiest sell (though Universal really wants to figure it out).

Of course, just because a sequel sounds like a no brainer on paper doesn’t mean it won’t be rejected by audiences. “Joker: Folie à Deux” comes to mind; the first movie earned over $1 billion, so of course Warner Bros. eventually greenlit a sequel. But it was dead on arrival, earning just over $200 million worldwide — one of the biggest financial disasters in movie history.

So studios have to tread carefully, but they are also in desperate need of fresh franchises. Could “Project Hail Mary” be one of them? Only time (and probably a lot of money) will tell.

What I’m into right now

• Lots of TV came back recently: “Daredevil: Born Again” season two, “For All Mankind” season five, “Invincible” season four, and “Monarch: Legacy of Monsters” season two. I like all of these shows to a certain extent, but also feel like I’m sticking with them out of a deranged sense of commitment. “For All Mankind” peaked in season two, and the others are part of a class of IP TV that I wonder how long can sustain itself.

Beyond the Traverse

⭐️ Weir said that Paramount rejected his “Star Trek” pitch and called their shows “shit.” Sounds like he has time to write a PHM sequel?

🎮 “Fortnite” maker Epic Games cut 1,000 jobs, raising questions about Disney’s deal with the company.

🪄 “Harry Potter” season two is being written, but it still won’t be a yearly show.

The Gist

• “Avengers: Doomsday” and “Dune: Part Three” are both still scheduled for the same day. Should Disney be worried?

• “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” broke trailer viewing records apparently. So what?

• “Wonder Man” was (surprisingly) renewed, and a check-in on Marvel’s comic sales.

“Dunesday” is coming. At least for now.

At the moment, both “Avengers: Doomsday” and “Dune: Part Three” are releasing on the same day on December 18 — referred to as Dunesday by fans and even Robert Downey Jr. They show no signs yet of backing off of those plans, with Warner Bros. dropping a trailer for the latter last week that includes the date.

Should Disney and Marvel be be worried? Depending on your online circles, that might be the consensus. “Dune: Part Three” will apparently wipe away “Doomsday” at the box office. That’s probably just my algorithm full of cinephiles; despite the post-pandemic decline of superhero movies at the box office, I don’t actually think there’s any evidence that “Doomsday” won’t be one of the biggest movies of the year. The core “Avengers” franchise is still regarded with fanfare beyond the MCU; it was Gen Alpha’s sixth favorite franchise in an NRG story last year, one of just four superhero franchises (which also included Spider-Man, Spider-Verse, and Batman — so really three if you combined the Spiders).

But it is telling that we’re even having this conversation; a decade ago, WB would have never thought to pit a movie against any Marvel movie, let alone an Avengers. Now, whether it be confidence or hope that it can ride a “Barbenheimer”-like wave, “Dune: Part Three” will go up against “Avengers: Doomsday.” It comes the year after WB finally topped Marvel at the box office with a DC movie, “Superman.” A year in which none of the three MCU movies released cracked $600 million.

This year will be different, though, and it’s not just because of “Doomsday.” “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” hits theaters this summer, and might give “Doomsday” a run for its money. Spider-Man seems to be the one superhero — aside from Batman, but even more so — that can currently carry a movie on his own to insane box office numbers. Last week, Sony dropped the first trailer for the movie, and it has apparently become the first movie trailer ever to reach 1 billion views. Whatever that means.

I find that number to be pretty meaningless, but I’ve already seen a lot of hardcore fans point to it as a sign that “superhero fatigue” isn’t real. Whatever you want to call it, the decline of superhero movies is measurable; analyst David A Gross estimated the genre made $2 billion last year, compared to $7 billion in 2018. Much of that has to do with less movies being released, but the three MCU movies released last year made a combined $1.3 billion, for an average of just over $430 million. Those are phase one numbers. And sure, studios would kill for some of their tentpole IP to reach those figures these days, but it still leaves a huge gap in the market.

Two things can be true: Superhero movies are not the center of the movie culture anymore and they can still be hugely successful under the right circumstances, including and especially MCU event movies like “Brand New Day” and “Doomsday.”

Okay, that’s the movie side. Another interesting thing happened with Marvel recently, as they renewed “Wonder Man” for a second season. This surprised me, given the show was received warmly by critics and viewers (including me) but didn’t pop in ratings. In its first week, it was watched for 618 million minutes in the US, according to Nielsen, which would equate to less than 3 million viewers, roughly (it’s an imperfect science, dividing the minutes viewed by the combined run time. But it’s the best we’ve got). Hit shows on other platforms that don’t have Marvel attached to their name, like Amazon’s “Fallout,” get triple those numbers.

So what is Marvel’s metric for success when it comes to TV now? Is it really focusing on quality over quantity? “Daredevil: Born Again” season two premieres this week, so maybe that will shed some more light on the question.

Of course, Marvel isn’t just movies and TV. I’ve written before about the decline in its comics output, if not in sales then in quality, as it cancels series quickly and seems to have no long-term strategy beyond just timing books with movie releases. Well, maybe that’s catching up with Marvel’s publishing side. In Q4 2025, DC’s efforts paid off and it overtook Marvel in sales in comic shops for the quarter. And for the full year, it sold 40 of the top 100 comic issues by units sold. Marvel had eight of the top 100, and one of those was the Deadpool/Batman crossover.

What I’m into this week

• I’m reading the 1989 sci-fi novel “Hyperion” by Dan Simmons, who recently passed away. Fuck, this is good!

• “Project Hail Mary” is every bit as fun as the hype suggests. I did not read that book, so I was delighted by the “twist.”

• Inspired by the above, I finally checked out 2016’s “The Nice Guys,” also starring Ryan Gosling. It went under the radar when it was first released, but it’s one of the funniest movies of the century.

Beyond the Traverse

🤖 Disney is pulling out of its deal with OpenAI after the company said it would shut down the Sora app.

• Here’s my previous piece on the deal and what it meant.

⭐️ Paramount+ is canceling “Star Trek: Starfleet Academy” after two seasons.

🗡️ Netflix’s “Assassin’s Creed” series will be set in ancient Rome in the year 64 AD.

The “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” reboot is not moving forward at Hulu.

Happy Oscars Sunday! One of my favorite days of the year, despite the insufferable discourse that pops up every year from people who only watch movies this week, or think they only movie they watched in a given year should win best picture.

Today, instead of offering my predictions (they are mostly aligned with every professional prognosticator, but I’m hoping for some surprises), here are my picks for what I’d vote for if I had a ballot.

But first, some thoughts on the aforementioned discourse:

• On Chalamet’s opera comments: Of course a 30-year-old movie star does not want movies — a mainstream artform and entertainment compared to opera/ballet — to become like opera/ballet. He wants to be one of the greats, but the actors he looks up to did not become great by only starring in franchise movies or small indies. But as the middle of the movie business is hallowed out, “prestige” is being thought of more and more as indie filmmaking — niche, like opera — and that’s probably terrifying to a young actor trying to make a name for himself. The “outrage” is unserious.

• On “One Battle” vs “Sinners”: As a film lover and Oscars enthusiast, I’m ecstatic that both movies with a shot at winning tonight are two of the best movies of the year. That’s rare. But the narrative is pitting these two incredibly worthy movies against one another, mostly from “Sinners” defenders. Look, I get it. “Sinners” winning would be a legitimately historic win, and I recognize I can’t truly understand some people’s criticisms with “One Battle.” That’s on me. But Ryan Coogler is almost guaranteed to win an Oscar tonight (original screenplay) regardless of the Best Picture outcome, and he’s just getting started. Let’s just love great movies.

Okay, my personal picks, if I had a ballot (NOT predictions):

• Picture: One Battle After Another

• Director: Ryan Coogler (Sinners)

• Actor: Leonardo DiCaprio (One Battle After Another)

• Actress: Jessie Buckley (Hamnet)

• Supporting actor: Benicio del Toro (One Battle After Another)

• Supporting actress: Amy Madigan (Weapons)

• Original screenplay: Blue Moon

• Adapted screenplay: One Battle After Another

• Animated feature: KPop Demon Hunters

• International feature: It Was Just An Accident

• Documentary feature: Abstain (I haven’t seen any of them, to be honest)

• Original score: One Battle After Another

• Original song: I Lied To You (Sinners)

• Sound: F1

• Casting: Sinners

• Production design: Marty Supreme

• Costume design: Frankenstein

• Makeup and hair styling: Frankenstein

• Cinematography: Sinners

• Film editing: One Battle After Another

• Visual effects: Avatar: Fire and Ash

• Short categories: Abstain

If you haven’t seen my 2026 Alternate Oscars, check them out here.

Enjoy the ceremony!

The Gist

• “Resident Evil Requiem,” the ninth installment in the 30-year-old game franchise, is outpacing previous entries in sales and is setting ratings records.

• It showcases how gaming series can withstand aging perhaps better than some movie franchises.

• To that end, Hollywood is going all in on game adaptations. A new report identified which ones might have the biggest potential.

After about 14 hours of playtime, I finished “Resident Evil Requiem” last night, the ninth game in the massively popular horror-action franchise.

It was just my second game in the series, though, having only played the “Resident Evil 4” remake prior to this. Despite not having a deep affinity for the franchise, I was compelled to play “Requiem.” The buzz was palpable, and it has seemingly lived up to the hype — perhaps like no other “Resident Evil” game?

It currently has the No. 2 highest user score of all time on Metacritic, behind only last year’s breakout hit “Clair Obscur: Expedition 33,” based on over 10,000 ratings. It’s the best-reviewed game in the series since the original “Resident Evil 4” over two decades ago.

It sold over 5 million units in five days, the fastest-selling game in the franchise; it took the last entry before this, “Resident Evil Village,” 6 months to hit 5 million units sold. It’s on pace to vastly outperform other previous entries — including the top seller, 2019’s “Resident Evil 2” remake, which sold 3 million copies in its first week, according to Polygon.

“Resident Evil” celebrates its 30th anniversary this month. So, why is this three-decade old gaming franchise arguably more popular than ever?

For longtime fans, “Requiem” seems to give the people what they want: a story that ties together several previous games with Easter eggs galore; gameplay that seamlessly blends the mix of action and horror the franchise is known for; and it stars a fan-favorite character, Leon S. Kennedy.

From ComicBook’s review: The game “finds a way to perfectly mesh all of the best aspects of the series so far. The result doesn’t just make Requiem one of the greatest Resident Evil games yet, but it stands as a perfect celebration of the franchise for its 30th anniversary.”

For newcomers like myself, I at least became a bit familiar with the series through the RE4 remake. If I had to pinpoint one major reason why “Requiem” is such a hit, from an outsider’s perspective, I’d say those remakes reinvigorated the franchise, interspersed between the last two new entries, “Village” and “Biohazard,” which weren’t as beloved as “Requiem” seems to be.

Overall, Capcom has put on a clinic in franchise management, regularly breathing life into a franchise about the undead through new entries for hardcore fans and remakes that attract new ones, something games have an advantage in compared to the movie business. If Disney tried remaking the original “Star Wars” trilogy with a new cast, the fandom would riot (the lesson Disney took from simply re-casting Han Solo for a prequel was to never try anything like that ever again). But gaming remakes have emerged in recent years — from “The Last of Us” to “Dead Space” — as a way to build something new but familiar from the ground up, with updated visuals and perhaps new content.

While “Resident Evil” may not have even peaked yet in popularity, some long-running movie franchises have seen better days in a post-pandemic market, from “Fast and Furious” to even the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Ironically, video game adaptations are becoming Hollywood’s shiny new object to hopefully fill the void — including a new “Resident Evil” movie set to be released this year from “Weapons” director Zach Cregger.

The games ripe for adaptation

“Resident Evil” the game franchise has overcome a history of less-than-successful movie adaptations, notably a string of films starring Mila Jovovich and directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. Most recently, Sony’s 2021 reboot, “Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City,” flopped with $42 million worldwide.

The next film will look to capitalize on both the surging popularity of the games as well as Cregger’s recent success with “Weapons.” But the movie points to a larger trend in Hollywood: As studios make fewer superhero movies, which ran the show during the 2010s, they have ramped up gaming adaptations.

According to Ampere Analysis, commissions (orders, not releases) of game adaptations (both movies and TV) has increased 18% annually since 2019, with commissions of live-action adaptations doubling their share in 2025 compared to 2024.

Pretty much ever major movie and TV studio is embracing video games: a “Bioshock” movie and “Assassin’s Creed” show are in the works at Netflix; Warner Bros.’ “A Minecraft Movie” was the biggest movie at the US box office last year; Universal is releasing “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” next month, after the first movie grossed over a billion dollars in 2023; Amazon’s “Fallout” series is a hit, and it has “God of War” and “Mass Effect” shows on the way; Paramount has created a reliable franchise out of Sonic and is set to adapt “Call of Duty” with Taylor Sheridan; and Sony, of course, has plenty of IP at its beck and call.

Disney seems to be the only studio not really following the trend (even though it probably should be), instead getting into games in other ways, particularly with a deal with Epic Games to create a Fortnite virtual universe based on its IP.

But even with all that, there is still popular game IP that hasn’t been snatched up by Hollywood yet. Ampere identified games that have high potential, based on an analysis of adaptations to find what correlates with success. One of the games identified was “Baldur’s Gate 3,” which was announced to be in the works at HBO after the report was conducted (they nailed it!).

I won’t list them all there, but here are some other titles that caught my eye: “Black Myth: Wukong,” “Hollow Knight: Silksong,” and “Death Stranding 2: On the Beach.” The study evaluates on a per-title basis, but the good news for the latter is that a “Death Stranding” movie is already in the works from A24, and the report notes that installments that form a continuous narrative could be assessed together (as opposed to something like “Far Cry,” where each installment tells a different story with new characters).

On “Silksong,” the report said: The game’s “transmedia potential is raised by several positive factors: a well-defined story; recent release year (newer titles perform better); and E10 ESRB rating that broadens the potential adaptation’s audience.” It also said that it is better suited for animation (hey Disney, are you listening?).

“Black Myth” stood out to me because I wrote about the game’s potential when it first came out in 2024. It was China’s first big-budget global gaming “hit,” but the vast majority of its success came from China, suggesting an adaptation may not carry well. But the recent history of China’s film business suggests a Chinese production could still be a sizable blockbuster even if most of its business comes from its home region.

At any rate, if recent adaptations like “Fallout” are any indication, and if Cregger’s movie is a hit, expect the “Resident Evil” games to get even bigger.

What I’m into this week

• “Resident Evil Requiem,” obviously. But it also made me want to go back and play “Resident Evil 2.”

• I think the latest batch of “Bridgerton” episodes stuck the landing and season four might be the show’s best yet.

• Apple’s “Monarch: Legacy of Monsters” is back. Despite a horrendous title, I still dig this show.

• I saw “EPIC: Elvis Presley in Concert” in theaters, and it’s unbelievable how good some of the footage looks.

Beyond the Traverse

🎮 PlayStation is preparing to pull back its games from PC, a sharp contrast from Xbox, which is lacking exclusive games anymore.

🐰 A new Wall Street Journal report digs deep into the state of Pixar as its new movie “Hoppers” jumps into theaters, including Pete Docter’s leadership and new movies it’s working on that were previously unreported.

🕷️ Sony intends to reboot its Spider-Man universe with “new people.” Um, okay.

📺 Paramount plans to combine Paramount+ and HBO Max (duh).

Welcome to the fourth annual Alternate Oscars! Or The Traversies? I still haven’t come up with an actual name yet.

When I first launched this newsletter I wrote my own “alternate universe” Oscars, selecting different nominees (and winners) for the main categories that weren’t nominated for the real thing. I also added new categories that aren’t part of the actual Oscars. Fun, right??

Here are the previous years:

• 2023

• 2024

• 2025

I tend to lean more heavily into genre since that’s more my speed, and the Oscars typically don’t. This year, though, is interesting: Ryan Coogler’s vampire movie “Sinners” is not only the most-nominated movie at this year’s actual Oscars, it broke the record for most nominations by any movie ever with 16. That’s more than “Titanic,” “La La Land,” and “All About Eve,” which all scored 14.

That said, the actual Oscars rejected franchise fare that this newsletter is all about, and which had been nominated in the past. Just last year, “Wicked” scored 10 nominations and won two. This year, “Wicked: For Good” nabbed a grand total of ZERO. “Avatar: Fire and Ash” also failed to land a best picture nomination after the first two movies did.

That wasn’t too surprising, though. Neither of those movies are as good as their predecessors. There were plenty of other surprises though that caused me to make some big decisions for these Alternate Oscars.

With that, on to the awards…

Best Picture

• 28 Years Later (Sony)

• Black Bag (Focus Features)

• Blue Moon (Sony Pictures Classics)

• Cloud (Janus Films)

• It Was Just An Accident (Neon)

• No Other Choice (Neon)

• Sorry, Baby (A24)

• Superman (Warner Bros.)

• Wake Up Dead Man (Netflix)

• Weapons (Warner Bros.)*

Warner Bros. had the best 2025 of any studio; maybe not the biggest, but the studio had a record number of No. 1 box-office hits throughout the year that surpassed expectations, and now “Sinners” and “One Battle After Another” are the best picture leaders for the actual Oscars. So, WB is leading the charge here too — “Weapons” was so good it was getting best picture buzz, and while that was probably overhyped in hindsight (it only landed a supporting actress nod, and the Oscars can’t dare recognize two horror movies in the pic race), Zach Cregger’s horror-thriller-comedy masterfully blends tones to be one of the most electric theater experiences of 2025.

Last year’s winner: Nosferatu

Director

• Danny Boyle (28 Years Later)

• Zach Cregger (Weapons)

• James Gunn (Superman)

• Joseph Kosinski (F1)*

• Jafar Panahi (It Was Just An Accident)

It was a shock to see Panahi left out of the director race, but it seems “It Was Just an Accident” didn’t have the juice that other international contenders (“Sentimental Value,” “The Secret Agent”) did. That said, I’m giving this to Kosinski, who successfully rode his good will from “Top Gun: Maverick” (a masterpiece) to deliver a technical marvel that was sublime on the big screen in Dolby. I’ve never cared about F1, but I’m always down for Brad Pitt doing movie star shit.

Last year’s winner: Robert Eggers (Nosferatu)

Actor

• Lee Byung-hun (No Other Choice)

• Joel Edgerton (Train Dreams)

• Dwayne Johnson (The Smashing Machine)

• Josh O’Connor (Wake Up Dead Man)

• Jesse Plemons (Bugonia)*

This was tough between O’Connor and Plemons, two actors who kind of steal their respective movies despite being paired with, in Plemons’ case, one of the best screen actresses of her generation, and for O’Connor, being the “co-lead” of a “Knives Out” movie where he overtakes Daniel Craig as the protagonist. But I’m giving the edge to Plemons, who is always a little too good at playing morally muddled characters (congrats on Plemons becoming a two-time Alternate Oscars winners; I gave it to him last time for guest performance for “Civil War”).

Last year’s winner: Aaron Pierre (Rebel Ridge)

Actress

• Sally Hawkins (Bring Her Back)

• Chase Infiniti (One Battle After Another)

• Jennifer Lawrence (Die My Love)*

• Amanda Seyfried (The Testament of Ann Lee)

• Eva Victor (Sorry, Baby)

Jennifer Lawrence has stepped back from the limelight in recent years, (remember when she was in “Hunger Games” and “X-Men” movies?), and her choices for her last couple of movies have really highlighted both her star power and range as an actress (she’s quite good in the comedy “No Hard Feelings”). “Die My Love” is perhaps her best performance to date — a tough watch, to be honest, but she’s worth it.

Last year’s winner: Zendaya (Challengers)

Supporting actor

• Miles Caton (Sinners)

• Michael Cera (The Phoenician Scheme)

• Ralph Fiennes (28 Years Later)*

• Paul Mescal (Hamnet)

• Kevin O’Leary (Marty Supreme)

Sorry to include O’Leary here, but he steals every scene he’s in in “Marty Supreme.” But the real showstopper of 2025 was Ralph Fiennes, who takes over the third act of “28 Years Later” with a humor, heart, and tenderness that in hindsight, was only an appetizer for what he does in “The Bone Temple.”

Last year’s winner: David Jonsson (Alien: Romulus)

Supporting actress

• Naomi Ackie (Sorry, Baby)

• Odessa A’Zion (Marty Supreme)

• Kerry Condon (F1)

• Elle Fanning (Predator: Badlands)*

• Hailee Steinfeld (Sinners)

Michael B. Jordan wasn’t the only one to knock it out of the park playing twins in 2025. In make-or-break performances, Fanning’s turn as dual synthetics in the latest “Predator” movie absolutely makes it. It’s an entertaining blast of the movie, but she certainly elevates it.

Last year’s winner: Adria Arjona (Hit Man)

Adapted screenplay

• 28 Years Later

• Die My Love

• No Other Choice

• Superman

• Wake Up Dead Man*

“Wake Up Dead Man” might be the best “Knives Out” movie yet, with Rian Johnson smartly lighting fire to today’s cult-like following of evangelical figures spouting division. The phone call scene between O’Connor and Bridget Everett is a knock out.

Last year’s winner: Dune: Part Two

Original screenplay

• Black Bag

• Cloud

• Jay Kelly

• Sorry, Baby

• Weapons*

“Weapons” should have been here in the real Oscars, but I’m glad to award it myself.

Last year’s winner: A Different Man

Breakthrough feature filmmaker

• Clint Bentley (Train Dreams)

• Eva Victor (Sorry, Baby)*

Sadly, I did not see “The Plague” yet, whose director Charlie Polinger won the DGA award for first feature. But in my mind, there’s no denying Eva Victor’s “Sorry, Baby.”

Last year’s winner: RaMell Ross (Nickel Boys)

Breakthrough film performance

• Miles Caton (Sinners)

• Chase Infiniti (One Battle After Another)*

• Jacobi Jupe (Hamnet)

• A$AP Rocky (Highest 2 Lowest)

• Alfie Williams (28 Years Later)

Not really much else to be said for Infiniti’s exhilarating performance in “One Battle After Another,” her first film role, which should have made it into the Oscar race, but may have been hurt by a case of category confusion (I think she’s the lead, but maybe voters didn’t see it that way).

Last year’s winner: Mikey Madison (Anora)

Motion capture and/or voice performance

• Oona Chaplin (Avatar: Fire and Ash)*

• Arden Cho (KPop Demon Hunters)

• Remy Edgerly (Elio)

• Fortune Feimster (Zootopia 2)

• Dimitrius Schuster-Koloamatangi (Predator: Badlands)

The obvious choice may have been to award this to Cho for “KPop Demon Hunter,” the sensation of the year. But Chaplin stole “Fire and Ash” for me, and the movie desperately needed more of her to make me like it more.

Last year’s winner: Lupita Nyong’o (The Wild Robot)

Guest performance

• Billy Crudup (Jay Kelly)*

• Bridget Everett (Wake Up Dead Man)

• Noah Jupe (Hamnet)

• William H. Macy (Train Dreams)

• Tramell Tillman (Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning)

Crudup is featured in one sequence in “Jay Kelly,” but it is undeniably the scene that you think about most after watching.

Last year’s winner: Jesse Plemons (Civil War)

Ensemble cast

• Jay Kelly

• Marty Supreme

• One Battle After Another

• Sinners*

• Weapons

This will be the first Oscars with a casting award, but I’m keeping this here as an ensemble win, similar to the top prize at SAG (sorry, Actor Awards). And “Sinners” — with its mix of super star Michael B. Jordan, veterans like Delroy Lindo, and an amazing discovery in Miles Caton — is the obvious choice.

Last year’s winner: Conclave

Stunt work/choreography

• Ballerina

• F1

• Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning*

• Predator: Badlands

• Thunderbolts

Nothing else could win here. Tom Cruise hanging off of the biplane (in IMAX) was one of the most awestruck, hair-raising experiences I’ve had in a theater.

Last year’s winner: Furiosa

The Genre Award (best action, comedy, horror, or sci-fi/fantasy movie)

• 28 Years Later (horror)

• Bring Her Back (horror)

• Final Destination: Bloodlines (horror/comedy)

• Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning (action)

• The Naked Gun (comedy/action)

• Predator: Badlands (sci-fi/action)

• Sinners (horror)

• Superman (sci-fi/adventure)*

• Thunderbolts (action/adventure)

• Weapons (horror/thriller)

I was originally going to award this to “Sinner,” but I feel that’s getting enough love in the actual Oscars. “Superman” is the movie that made me most happy in 2025; it’s unapologetically wacky, joyful, and comic-book flavored, and understands the character better than most screen interpretations. I will always be one of its biggest defenders.

Last year’s winner: Dune: Part Two

The Gist

• Hasbro is thriving after a pivot to digital gaming, while Mattel is going all in on Hollywood.

• The two toy companies showcase different paths in the entertainment industry.

• Mattel has two movies coming out this year, while Hasbro has stepped away from Hollywood productions.

Yes, a new “Toy Story 5” trailer dropped this week, but that’s not what this post is about.

In the toy business, the “Big Two” are on very different paths. Both Hasbro and Mattel reported earnings earlier this month; the former exceeded expectations, while the latter disappointed. The biggest differentiator seems to be Hasbro’s pivot to digital experiences; its CEO Chris Cocks said that the company would double down on video games and that it has 10 in development.

Mattel, though, is going all in on the movie business, something Hasbro abandoned when it sold its entertainment studio eOne. Yes, Hasbro is still “in” the business, but isn’t materially involved in the projects anymore like it used to be. And yes, Mattel is also focusing on games and said this week that it was taking full ownership of the mobile games studio Mattel163.

But Mattel by contrast is leaning heavily into its film and TV unit Mattel Studios. Its first movies since 2023’s “Barbie” are set to be released this year: “Master of the Universe” from Amazon in June and “Matchbox” from Apple in October. The former is leaning heavy on nostalgia, but I don’t think nostalgia for He-Man is as high for guys as nostalgia for Barbie was for women (not to mention Amazon has yet to convince us it can open a blockbuster; “Project Hail Mary” will be tested first). “Matchbox” I think could be a bigger hit at the box office, filling that “Fast and Furious” gap at the movies — if it was getting a theatrical release, which at this point it’s not.

Meanwhile, Hasbro has largely unshackled itself from Hollywood expectations. There are still movies and shows based on its IP in the works — notably, a “Baldur’s Gate” series for HBO, a “Forgotten Realms” series for Netflix, and a “Power Rangers” show for Disney+. But the real juice is in Hasbro’s digital gaming division, which grew 45% in 2025 off the back of an initiative the company calls “Playing to Win.”

The future of that initiative, and of Hasbro itself, might be more interactivity. As I reported, the company last year started building an AI Studio that would lay the groundwork for a platform that “will change how fans interact with their favorite characters” and “blend physical and digital play.”

Ironically, that seems more and more like the future of Hollywood: Disney in particular is giving fans more interaction with their favorite characters, from a planned Fortnite universe to its deal with OpenAI’s Sora video generator. Maybe that’s just what any company that owns valuable IP will become.

Plus: Amazon’s anime ambitions

As if Amazon didn’t control enough already, now it wants to be “the preferred destination for anime content globally,” according to an exec during a recent online showcase of its originals.

It of course has some competition. Crunchyroll is an anime-specific service with over 1,300 titles and Netflix has been talking up its anime offerings. It said last year that at least half of its global members watch anime. In its most recent engagement report, it said that 4% of global viewing on its platform in the second half of 2025 was for anime.

Is an “anime war” brewing? More on that in a future edition.

What I’m into this week

• I LIKED THE NEW “WUTHERING HEIGHTS”! All the book nerds need to chill (I also recommend the soundtrack by Charli XCX).

• “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms” is some of the best “Game of Thrones” TV since season six of the original series.

• If you’re looking to get into American super hero comic books, it is a great time to start reading DC. The Absolute books are a great reimagining of classic characters, and the publisher is gearing up for a new “Next Level” initiative this year with fresh starts for some lesser known characters. They also just relaunched the Vertigo line for original, more mature titles (“Bleeding Hearts,” about a zombie whose heart starts beating again, is a good start).

Beyond the Traverse

🕷️ After the flops of “Madame Web” and “Kraven,” Sony is developing an animated Venom movie.

🏎️ Jerry Bruckheimer says a sequel to the “F1” movie is in the works (maybe a Matchbox-F1 crossover?).

🍿 Most staffers at Warner Bros. now support Netflix buying the studio over Paramount.

The Gist

• Netflix’s interest in Warner Bros. has re-ignited the “Restore the SnyderVerse” movement.

• It would be in the company’s best interest though to stay the current course.

• Plus: What’s going on with the Hollywood trades?

For the first time, Netflix is finding itself on the hot seat. Co-CEO Ted Sarandos answered questions during a Senate hearing this week on its planned purchase of Warner Bros. and HBO, the first, or at least rare, occurrence where the streaming giant is facing regulatory scrutiny. Like so many of these hearings go, Sarandos was mostly bombarded with accusations of “woke ideology” from Republicans, and occasional questions of actual substance by Democrats.

The former is truly nauseating considering Netflix has never been shy about offering content for everyone, including the right. I’m not sure how the same company that has a “Kill Tony” comedy deal and stood by Dave Chappelle amid his controversy over anti-trans comments could be considered “woke.” Whatever fuels the culture war rage machine, though.

But Netflix’s potential acquisition of WB hasn’t just put it in the crosshairs of Washington; it’s revived an often toxic, conspiratorial fandom. If Netflix wants to be more like a traditional Hollywood studio, then that’s what it will put up with (It already got a taste when “Stranger Things” fans were convinced Netflix would drop a “secret” finale after they were dissatisfied with the real one. Pretty similar to the below!)

Almost as soon as Netflix announced it was buying WB, the “Restore the SnyderVerse” crowd came out of the woodwork to call for the streamer to revive Zack Snyder’s DC film universe — which was already “revived” on HBO Max in 2021 with “Zack Snyder’s Justice League,” which was basically an expensive director’s cut. But fans weren’t satisfied, as Snyder used his WB money to add extra material that teased future projects. Oops.

The Netflix “Restore the SnyderVerse” movement even predates the company’s interest in WB, spurred by Snyder’s multiple projects with the streamer, like his zombie action movie “Army of the Dead” and his sci-fi duology “Rebel Moon.” Snyder, ever the instigator, said during an interview in 2023 that he’d be happy to come back to his DCU if Netflix somehow had the rights. Oops again.

Sarandos put his foot in his mouth during the Senate hearing this week, accidentally fueling speculation that Gunn’s “Superman” was a box-office flop for bad actors to pounce on. When talking about theatrical windows, he mentioned that windows would fluctuate based on performance of a movie, noting that “Superman” had a shorter window than “Sinners.”

I didn’t see Sarandos’ comments as conflating “Superman’s” success with its shortened window, and I don’t think any sane person would. The movie came to PVOD after 30 days, which Gunn has already said was to align with the release of “Peacemaker” season 2, and it didn’t hit HBO Max until 70 days. Fairly standard in this day and age. But Snyder fans took this as vindication that Gunn’s movie was a disaster (even though he’s already planning a semi-sequel set to be released in 2027). The right-wing entertainment blog “Cosmic Book News” (not going to bother linking out to this so-called “publication”) framed it as Sarandos “confirming” that the movie was a flop; never mind that it’s not Sarandos’ call (yet).

Nobody has insight into Netflix’s plans for DC movies and TV if it closes this deal, probably not even Netflix at this point. But it would be in the company’s best interest to stick with the current James Gunn plan. The Snyder era of DC was a time of painful, dramatic missteps, and last year’s “Superman” infused some much-needed energy into the franchise.

Let’s clear some things up: “Superman” was, indeed, a success, grossing $618 million worldwide off a $225 million budget. Maybe not a super smash, but a comfortable hit. It’s not as much as Snyder’s “Man of Steel” back in 2013, but its value goes far beyond sheer box office numbers; it has breathed new life into DC movies. Anecdotally, plenty of people watching at home expressed regret they hadn’t seen it in a theater; it reached 13 million viewers on HBO Max in its first 10 days, the streamer’s biggest movie launch since “Barbie.” I think the follow-up, “Man of Tomorrow,” will be a big hit. But with “Superman,” WB can say for the first time in years that a DC movie topped Marvel at the box office.

Snyder’s Netflix projects, meanwhile, flailed. The streamer took a bet that he’d create new universes with his “Dead” and “Rebel Moon” movies that never took off. “Zack Snyder’s Justice League” on HBO Max was a niche effort. Not many people actually finished the four-hour movie when it debuted. Beyond Snyder, the DC “Extended Universe” over the last few years was a mess. In 2023, WB released four DCEU movies. Two of them made less than $200 million. “The Flash” didn’t reach $300 million. Only “Aquaman 2” crossed $400 million. The franchise had simply lost steam, and it had been for a while.

For what it’s worth, I have spoken to Snyder super fans when I reported for Business Insider, and they’re obviously not all toxic. I’m sure most just genuinely want to see Snyder’s vision completed, and that’s fine! But it doesn’t help that Snyder’s DC movies have been co-opted by the far right, whether it’s stupid entertainment blogs or Donald Trump himself. When the “Superman” movie was released last year, every right-wing commentator with perverted views of masculinity were comparing it to Snyder’s version.

Further, I actually liked the “Snyder Cut”! At least more than the theatrical version. But it was always a bone thrown to ravenous fans at a time when Warner was desperate for streaming content during the pandemic after just launching Max.

Ultimately, that decision has only fueled the fire that Netflix will now have to either put out or, God forbid, fan the flames of.

Plus: What’s going with the trades?

Speaking of right-wing media, has anyone noticed that the Hollywood trades — nearly all of which are owned by billionaire Jay Penske — are doing their own bit of kowtowing to the current culture?

I started noticing when Variety published in July a 4,000-word profile of Dean Cain, who has not been relevant as an actor in nearly three decades and had no new projects to publicize. But because the new “Superman” movie had just been released, and Cain used to play Superman on TV and he was outspoken about its, I don’t know, “wokeness,” that demanded thousands of words.

More recently, the trades were fawning over the “Melania” documentary. Variety exclaimed it beat expectations at the box office with a $7 million opening weekend; Hollywood Reporter and Deadline called it the best showing in a decade for a documentary in their headlines, while boasting that it had an A Cinemascore.

That might be true, but it barely beat already low expectations, which were projected based the history of documentaries at the box office. Amazon also spent about $80 million buying and marketing the movie, which in traditional box-office terms would make “Melania” a big ol’ flop. The trades may have reported on that context, but it might as well have been in the fine print compared to their headlines.

Early last year, Variety took heat for a tweet in which it downplayed the “Sinners” opening box office by noting that profitability was “still a ways away.” So the “Melania” coverage was even more confounding, but maybe not surprising.

Even the way Variety framed Kid Rock headlining Turning Point USA’s Sunday concert was eyeroll-inducing: Kid Rock Will Headline Turning Point USA’s Super Bowl Halftime Show, Offering Alternative to Bad Bunny ‘for Folks Who Love America’

This is not a “Super Bowl Halftime Show,” it is an alternate concert taking place at the same time. There is only one Super Bowl Halftime, and Bad Bunny is doing it like it or not. And including the quote in that context is just…barf.

Not to mention, THR’s social media is screaming “AI did this.” Look at this Thread:

One man pretty much controls all of this. This is why so many are turning to independent voices for entertainment coverage. Pretty soon the trades will just be promotional platforms for other Penske-owned product like the Golden Globes, if they aren’t already.

What I’m into this week

• I finally caught up on Prime Video’s “Fallout” season 2 and still think this show is a banger, and I’m impressed with the world it’s building. Can’t wait for season 3.

• HBO’s new “Game of Thrones” show “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms” has been so refreshing, and Friday’s episode, dropped early due to the Super Bowl, was stellar.

• I’m three episodes into Marvel’s new series “Wonder Man,” and it’s surprisingly enjoyable. I wasn’t interested at first but checked it out after good buzz; I’ll stick with it.

• Sam Raimi’s new movie “Send Help” is vintage Raimi: fun, gross, meant to be seen with a crowd.

Beyond the Traverse

🎮 A “Baldur’s Gate” series is coming to HBO from “Chernobyl” and “Last of Us” creator Craig Mazin.

🪚 A24 landed the rights to “Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” and will start with a TV series.

⚔️ Apple secured the rights to Brandon Sanderson’s Cosmere universe, with plans to turn the “Mistborn” series into movies and “Stormlight” into a TV series.

🏔️ “Predator: Badlands” director Dan Trachtenberg signed a first-look deal with Paramount. I’m assuming he would still be able to make more Predator though.

The Gist

• A new report reinforces how Netflix’s engagement is slowing and how theatrical movies can succeed on streaming.

• It further shows why Netflix wants to buy WB — and why it may actually want to give the theater business a go.

• The report also highlighted how Marvel’s movies last year didn’t exactly do gangbuster numbers.

“We were not in the theatrical business when I made those observations…When this deal closes, we will be in the theatrical business.”

That’s how Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos defended his previous comments about theatrical exhibition during the company’s earnings call on Tuesday. It was just the latest in a string of similar comments Sarandos has made recently. He’s also stressed that WB movies would have a 45-day window before going to Netflix.

People are still, understandably, skeptical about Netflix’s ambitions. But if we take Sarnados at is word, there are also simple arguments to be made for his pivot.

Yes, Netflix is still the dominant Hollywood streaming platform in the business. But as Sarandos likes to point out, YouTube is watched more often, and Netflix’s engagement is slowing. More movies and shows would help with that.

That’s backed up by a new report from Luminate, which found that Netflix’s share of viewing time in the US was down in 2025 compared to the three previous years (still at 59%, though). HBO Max was at 6%; “combining” them would theoretically give Netflix 65% of viewing time, increasing its share.

And as I pointed out recently, Netflix kind of sucks at developing new movie franchises. Its most costly movie ever, “The Electric State,” was a huge miss last year. Zack Snyder’s “Rebel Moon” movies were huge busts.

Not for nothing, but it kinda has a TV problem in that regard, too. Yes, “Wednesday,” “Bridgerton,” and “Squid Game” are all massive hits, but their first seasons are still by far their biggest despite Netflix adding more subscribers. And big-budget shows like “3 Body Problem” and “The Witcher” have been busts; the former was granted a final second season to hastily wrap everything up, and the latter has flailed since its promising first season. WB and HBO IP could dramatically beef up Netflix’s TV library.

Back to movies: “KPop Demon Hunters,” Netflix’s biggest movie of all time, is its only blockbuster with franchise potential, and a sequel is years away. And it inherited that through a deal with Sony (which it also just struck another deal with to stream its movies globally after their theatrical releases).

Further, according to the Luminate report, the top streaming movies of 2025 in the US were No. 1 “Wicked” on Peacock, No.2 “Demon Hunters,” No. 3 “Moana 2” on Disney+, and No. 4 “Happy Gilmore 2” on Netflix, a sequel to a movie that premiered in theaters three decades ago.

A recent Bloomberg analysis of five years’ worth of Nielsen data also found that “Moana” and “Encanto,” both on Disney+, were the most-watched streaming movies in the US since 2020. “KPop” came in third, which is impressive since it came out in 2025…but that’s the only Netflix original in the top 10. Most everything else premiered in theaters first, minus two Pixar movies that debuted on Disney+ during the pandemic.

So, Netflix knows it is stronger when it partners with traditional studios or can leverage their content. And there’s plenty of data that shows how streaming movies can benefit from a theatrical release from a studio. So, why not buy one?

Disney’s dilemma continues

That Bloomberg analysis also found that Disney+ has pretty much stalled in viewing over the last three years, despite the big animated movies and a string of Marvel and “Star Wars” shows (that have mostly come and gone).

The Luminate report also shows that Marvel’s movies aren’t exactly doing gangbusters on streaming after their tepid theatrical releases, reinforcing that the franchise is only thriving now during event releases like “Deadpool and Wolverine.”

That movie was watched for 1.34 billion minutes in the US in its first week on Disney+ in 2024, according to Nielsen, or roughly 10 million viewers.

That’s double last year’s top Marvel movie, “Captain America: Brave New World,” which was watched for 651 million minutes in its first week (around 5 million viewers), according to Luminate (yeah yeah, different sources. Whatever). “Thunderbolts” and “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” were watched by 3 million and 4 million viewers in their first weeks on Disney+, respectively.

Those movies largely disappointed at the box office, too, with none making the worldwide top 10 last year and none crossing $600 million.

This year could mark a turning point, as Disney will release its first “Avengers” and “Star Wars” movies in seven years, and it’s fully integrating Hulu into Disney+. But the streaming numbers should be an eye opener.

What I’m into this week

• I’m still diving into the Star Trek universe. I completed my watch of the original six movies and re-watched the reboot trilogy. I even started the TV series “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.” But that’s it.

• HBO’s new “Game of Thrones” show, “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms,” premiered last week. It’s a light-hearted counter to the super seriousness of the other spinoff, “House of the Dragon.”

• Count me in for Amazon’s “Masters of the Universe” movie. The first trailer leans on nostalgia, fun, and absurdity, as it should.

Beyond the Traverse

🏆 Sinners broke the record for most Oscar nominations for a single movie, with 16. “Wicked: For Good” was shut out.

🖥️ What’s worse: Coverage of festival clapping or trailer views? The “Doomsday” teasers gained a combined “1.02 billion views,” whatever that means.

🎮 Ubisoft canceled a “Prince of Persia” remake and other games as part of another reorg.

The Gist

• Kathleen Kennedy has stepped away from running Lucasfilm, with Dave Filoni and Lynwen Brennan taking over.

• It’s a chance for a much-needed reset for “Star Wars,” but that will be easier said than done.

• With movies finally coming to the big screen this year and in 2027, the next phase after that will be crucial to getting the franchise back on track.

Kathleen Kennedy has officially stepped away from her role as Lucasfilm president, handing the reins of the Star Wars franchise over to Clone Wars and Mandoverse architect Dave Filoni on the creative side and Lynwen Brennan on the business side.

This was in the making for nearly a year, as Puck first reported last February that she would be exiting in the New Year (followed by an embarrassing softball interview with Deadline in which she said she would “never retire from movies” (true!) but didn’t actually deny the report).

The toxic corners of the fanbase, upset about diversity and culture war bullshit, are likely cheering this on. But my gripes had more to do with the constant stream of announcements that went nowhere, the ill-conceived sequel trilogy, the slew of misbegotten TV shows, etc. The bad largely outweighed the good (“The Last Jedi,” “Andor,” the first two seasons of “The Mandalorian”).

I’ve written ad nauseam about those issues during her tenure, including this piece from June ‘24 when I first suggested she should step down, and this piece, titled “Star Wars is Broken,” which is one of my most-read and liked stories.

So I won’t rehash them here. Instead, I’d rather look to the future.

In the short term, Disney is finally releasing a new “Star Wars” movie this summer, its first in an egregious seven years. “The Mandalorian and Grogu,” though, is not the key to a fresh start for the franchise on the big screen. Next year, “Star Wars: Starfighter” will hit theaters.

Beyond that, Lucasfilm had announced several projects — including films set in the past, from James Mangold, and future, with Daisy Ridley returning as Rey — but those don’t seem to be moving forward any time soon. Kennedy told Deadline that the Mangold project is “on hold” and Hollywood Reporter reports that a Filoni Mandoverse crossover movie is “on the back burner.” (Shocking!)

Kennedy also told Deadline that “anything’s a possibility if somebody’s willing to take a risk,” which seemed like a subtle shot at Bob Iger for turning down a Steven Soderbergh Kylo Ren movie.

So what exactly will the future of “Star Wars” look like? While “Starfighter” could be the start of a new series of films, that on paper feels more like Lucasfilm wanting to get something out the door quickly, hiring proven franchise do-gooder Shawn Levy, director of “Deadpool and Wolverine,” to churn out a relatively safe-sounding entry starring Ryan Gosling after Disney put the brakes on TV output.

In reality, the franchise’s own success has been its achilles’ heel. Its tethered so closely to the original trilogy, and even the prequels now, that anything “fresh” has an uphill battle to climb. The sequel trilogy mostly fumbled with the fanbase over doing the Big Three dirty, and Disney has been trying to course correct since by shoehorning de-aged Luke Skywalker into “The Mandalorian” and “Ahsoka.”

Disney seems to be realizing that too, as it’s scrapping the sequel trilogy characters at Disneyland in favor of OGs like Darth Vader.

In my mind, the next “Star Wars” big-screen epic should probably take place so far into the future that it’s almost removed entirely from any current canon. That would be a true fresh start; a new trilogy mapped out ahead of time that would instruct the theatrical IP for another decade, anchored by fresh characters and settings that would give new life to “Star Wars.”

In the mean time, the die hard fans can enjoy expanded content. TV can continue to tackle the “present”-day Mandoverse — which is aiming to retroactively make sense of “The Rise of Skywalker” (Great, leave that on streaming) — and gaming can tackle the past through the “Star Wars Jedi” games and the in-development “Fate of the Old Republic.” The books and comics can do whatever the fuck they want.

The problem with the franchise post- “Rise of Skywalker” is that it’s been muddled with countless TV shows seemingly just for the sake of it to boost Disney+. I’ve actually been exploring a “Star” rival in “Star Trek,” which I was never really familiar with but have been enjoying my journey. That has the benefit of originating as a TV series that continuously revamped itself, and it’s gotten back to those roots big time in recent years. But that’s not really what “Star Wars” is, and it’s not what Disney wants it to be anymore.

Plus, few of the Disney+ shows were the kinds of hits you’d expect from “Star Wars.” “The Mandlorian” was a blockbuster and “Andor” had a decent audience but also elevated the franchise into TV prestige. Meanwhile, “The Acolyte” was canceled after one season; “The Book of Boba Fett” and “Ahsoka” has mostly alienated casual fans who didn’t pay attention to Filoni’s precious “Clone Wars.”

Now that Disney is seemingly making fewer TV shows, there’s a chance for “Star Wars” movies to capture again that more casual audience and ignite excitement from a new generation of fans that they’ll need to sustain the franchise for years to come. “Starfighter” might be a good start. After that, Filoni will have his work cut out for him…but I think it’s time to stop digging into the past and forge the future.

What I’m into this week

• Like I said, I’m digging a bit into the Trek universe, and have moved on from the original series to the original movies. “The Wrath of Khan” is, obviously superb, and “The Voyage Home” is hilariously fun.

• I saw “28 Years Later: The Bone Temple” and it’s so much better than I ever expected it to be, equal parts entertaining (it’s surprisingly funny) and brutal with incredible performances from Ralph Fiennes and Jack O’Connell.

Beyond the Traverse

🎟️ Netflix co-CEO is changing his tune about theaters, saying he would embrace a 45-day window for WB movies and that he wants to “win the box office.”

🎮 Nintendo’s president says he wants to create a system to release movies beyond Mario and Zelda.

🍿 A new analysis from Greenlight Analytics breaks down what kinds of original IP works in theaters.

Many of the best movies of 2025 wrestled with modern anxieties, from conspiracy culture (“Bugonia”) to children in peril (“Weapons”).

It was a year where a veteran filmmaker like Paul Thomas Anderson made one of his best films, while the next generation, like Zach Cregger and Ryan Coogler, upped their game.

That said, I had a tough time making my top 10; only a select few films really wow’ed me this year. Ultimately, I tried capturing a wide array of movies to reflect the year, from the sci-fi superheroics of “Superman” to the beauty of “Train Dreams.” (I was also heavily persuaded by the movies that inspired my longest Letterboxd reviews).

In the end, though, many conventional “prestige” pictures fell short of unique genre films when it came to finalizing my top 10 (witches, zombies, and vampires…oh my, indeed).

And at a time when cinema seems eternally in crisis mode, I was probably swayed by the overall theatrical experience, as well — though at least one Netflix original I didn’t catch on the big screen made the final 10.

But I also have plenty of honorable mentions I quite enjoyed from 2025 I want to shout out, including:

Steven Soderbergh’s sleek and sexy spy thriller, “Black Bag”; Chloé Zhao’s Shakespearean (literally) tragedy, “Hamnet”; Iranian filmmaker Jafar Panahi’s “It Was Just An Accident”; Noah Baumbach’s Netflix dramedy about an aging actor, “Jay Kelly”; the bloated and messy, but enormously exciting and audacious, “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning”; Korean master Park Chan-wook’s “No Other Choice”…

…Takes a breath…

…a fresh take on an old franchise in “Predator: Badlands”; “The Secret Agent,” from Brazil; Joachim Trier’s “Sentimental Value”; the most exciting directorial debut of the year, “Sorry Baby”; “Thunderbolts,” one of Marvel’s best since “Endgame”; and Rian Johnson’s third “Knives Out” entry (and second for Netflix), “Wake Up Dead Man.”

Now let’s get into the top 10…

10. F1

Director: Joseph Kosinski

I don’t care at all about F1 the sport, but I do care about big movies where Brad Pitt does movie star shit, and there’s an added bonus when it’s from the director of “Top Gun: Maverick.” “F1” isn’t as wondrous as that movie, but it is a technical marvel, and the kind of high-octane, big-budget adult sports drama Hollywood doesn’t make anymore. Seeing this in a pristine Dolby theater was exhilarating.

How to watch: Apple TV

9. 28 Years Later

Director: Danny Boyle

Boyle and writer Alex Garland return to the “28 (blank) Later” franchise that they started over two decades ago with a surprisingly emotional take on the modern zombie genre they helped create. Other movies on this list are about the lengths parents will go for their kids, but “28 Years Later” is, ultimately, about the lengths children will go for their parents. It holds its cards close to the chest, but when the movie finally reveals its true self, it becomes something truly unexpected.

How to watch: Netflix

8. Cloud

Director: Kiyoshi Kurosawa

Finally, a movie about the scourge of online resellers. But really, Japanese filmmaker Kiyoshi Kurosawa’s latest is a quiet and then bombastic take down of how the internet and economic desperation make for a lethal combo that strips us of all of our humanity and connection (making it a solid double feature with Kurosawa’s own “Pulse”).

How to watch: The Criterion Channel

7. Train Dreams

Director: Clint Bentley

I mentioned before how 2025’s movies took on modern anxieties, but “Train Dreams” is the one movie on my list that most adequately takes on the most universal ones: loneliness, loss, distance. Some naysayers who read the Denis Johnson novella this is based on don’t like this movie, for how it paints its protagonist, Robert Grainer (an incredible Joel Edgerton), as an innocent bystander throughout his tragic life. I did not read the source material, so I don’t care. This movie is beautiful.

How to watch: Netflix

6. Bugonia

Director: Yorgos Lanthimos

I have never totally vibed with Lanthimos as a filmmaker, even his more “popular” works like “The Favourite” and “Poor Things.” But “Bugonia” was the first movie of his that completely won me over: A chaotic, pitch black attack of capitalism, greed, conspiracy, and misinformation that never feels like it’s trying too hard (“Eddington” could never). Maybe this worked for me because it feels like Lanthimos is showing some restraint compared to those aforementioned recent films (don’t worry: the ending in particular is still insane, and the final few minutes are some of the most surreal stuff you’ll see in a movie from 2025).

How to watch: Peacock

5. Marty Supreme

Director: Josh Safdie

This is not a sports movie or an athlete biopic. At one point, Kevin O’Leary’s Milton tells Timothee Chalamet’s Marty that he’ll live forever, like a vampire, and he’ll never be happy. That’s what this thing is all about: It’s a manic, darkly hilarious thriller about a terrible guy doing selfish things who is cursed to be miserable. And it’s a lot more fun than that sounds, going places you’ll never see coming, like a white ball against a white shirt.

How to watch: Still in theaters

4. Sinners

Director: Ryan Coogler

An original, successful movie that already feels part of a larger world is hard to come by in this movie landscape, but Coogler delivers just that with “Sinners.” After working with beloved IP (“Creed,” “Black Panther”) for a decade, Coogler got the blankest of checks for this vampire action-drama, and delivered (lots of vampire love between this and “Marty,” apparently).

How to watch: HBO Max or Prime Video

3. Weapons

Director: Zach Cregger

Cregger builds on the success of his debut feature, 2022’s “Barbarian,” with a more thought-provoking and provocative follow up that feeds on our fears and never stops until the credits roll. It’s also hilarious, perfectly blending Cregger’s comedic timing and absurd sensibilities with his horror bonafides. If you’re reading this, I hope you got to see it in a packed theater with like-minded sickos.

How to watch: HBO Max

2. Superman

Director: James Gunn

Gunn’s “Superman,” a new take on the Man of Steel meant to kickstart a fresh DC screen universe, is unapologetically sci-fi flavored and comic-book coded, and it’s bursting with joy. Often these lists come down to battles between my head and my heart, and “Superman” was the movie that most captured the latter in 2025.

How to watch: HBO Max

1. One Battle After Another

Director: Paul Thomas Anderson

“The movie for the moment” is often a cliche, but this is about as timely and biting as you could ask for. A lot of movies this year could make that claim, from “Eddington” to “Bugonia.” But only “One Battle” delivers electric political satire with the humor and fury of Paul Thomas Anderson, a filmmaker who has toiled with the pitfalls of the American dream in previous works (“There Will Be Blood,” “The Master”), but never in a modern-day setting. And the result is a modern classic.

How to watch: HBO Max

The best other stuff

• I already published my top 10 TV shows of 2025, including “Pluribus,” “Andor,” and more…

• Everyone was talking about “Clair Obscur: Expedition 33” in ‘25, but my favorite video game of the year was “Dispatch,” a Telltale-style game that often feels more like watching a TV series.

Instead of a typical reflection piece, I’ve decided to let you all know what my most-popular pieces of 2025 were (excluding listicles like my very wrong box-office predictions or top 10 TV shows), as I think they capture the year in entertainment fairly well. Below are the headlines/links to each story, along with a short excerpt. As always, thanks for reading!

Let’s get into it:

1. ‘Thunderbolts’ gives Marvel a jolt

“I’m actually putting my fan hat on today rather than my business hat. This newsletter has always been about marrying the two, but I tend to lean more towards the latter; ‘Thunderbolts,’ though, has renewed my interest in the future of the MCU so much that I’m going to spend this newsletter channeling my comic nerd knowledge.”

2. Star Wars is broken

“I’ve written about the diminishing returns of the Disney+ TV shows and their dwindling viewership. ‘The Acolyte’ was quickly canceled and there’s hardly a peep about ‘Skeleton Crew’ (which I actually enjoyed). It has yet to chart on Nielsen’s weekly streaming rankings … That’s what happens when you run a franchise into the ground. Disney is obviously going to back away from the onslaught of TV shows (after spending the last half-decade turning Star Wars into Star Trek), but is it too late?”

3. The Disney remake death knell

“These remakes largely serve no purpose to stimulate Disney IP beyond the few that have made a lot of money (and the few others that have actually been decent). They do nothing for the Disney brand beyond maybe reminding people that the much better originals exist, which are now readily available with the click of a button.”

4. Special report: A movie studio bought a theater chain. Then layoffs happened.

“The layoffs at Alamo raised an eyebrow because they come just half a year after Sony Pictures Entertainment bought the company — the first such acquisition after the “Paramount Decree” sunset in 2020, allowing a movie studio to more easily buy a theater chain. Another wrinkle to this: The NYC layoffs occurred amid bargaining of a new contract between Alamo and NYC Alamo union…

5. A Sinematic universe?

“I’ve written at length about how the movie business is in desperate need of new franchises to support the future, as the old guard — from Transformers to Fast and Furious to even the MCU — run their course. Audiences have shown an appetite for fresh stories on the big screen post-pandemic, but ‘Sinners’ is the first big post-pandemic hit that is a purely original story…”

6. Are Marvel’s movies hurting its comics?

“There’s obviously a strategy to time comic releases to movie releases; that’s probably not new, but it does seem even more prevalent in recent years. The series never last that long, which makes sense if the only publishing incentive is to cash in on movies without any long-term creative goal or vision.”

7. The kids are alright. Is Hollywood?

“Animated family movies were the top movies at both the box office (‘Inside Out 2’) and on streaming in the US (‘Moana’) [in 2024] ... And yet, Hollywood’s investment in kids content is slowing.”

8. Yes, Avatar has a cultural footprint

If ‘Fire and Ash’ performs on par with the first two movies, the Avatar franchise would surpass the likes of Batman and X-Men as one of the 10 biggest movie franchises ever — after only three movies. Here’s more perspective: Do you know how hard it is for an original movie to not only become one of the highest-grossing movies of all time, but also spawn a sequel that also becomes one of the highest-grossing movies of all time? VERY hard!”

9. Marvel’s missing magic

“I wrote in 2022, when I reported at Business Insider, that cracks in Marvel’s armor were starting to show. I wrote that as the franchise grew, audiences would likely become more selective about what they consume. And that appears to be exactly what’s happening.”

10. Is this The Last of Us’ Game of Thrones or Walking Dead moment?

“At any rate, this is a fascinating look at the dichotomy between different screen mediums: the interactive nature of video games versus the week-to-week waiting for a TV series. How will fans of the game respond to the show? Unlike Amazon’s ‘Fallout,’ which told a new story set in the same world as the games, ‘The Last of Us’ is adapting the same story…”

11. Netflix’s Warner Bros. bet

12. The next video-game movie blockbuster?

13. The new anime frontier

14. A job for Superman

15. Hasbro is building an AI studio

The Gist

• The 2025 domestic box office is expected to be close to the 2024 total.

• This was predictable, and might be the new normal.

• 2026 was always better on paper, but even that isn’t as strong as it once was.

Variety: “The Movie Theater Comeback That Wasn’t: Why 2025 Was Such a Dud for Struggling Cinemas.”

The LA Times: “Even ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’ can’t lift 2025 box office out of pandemic-crisis doldrums.”

Slashfilm: “Why The 2025 Box Office Was A Major Disappointment (And A Bad Sign For The Future).”

Those are a couple of the headlines I’ve seen recently examining why the 2025 box office fell short, despite being a full year removed from the 2023 Hollywood writers’ and actors’ strikes that delayed production and shifted release dates.

The thinking was that this year would be a rebound year. A December 2023 Hollywood Reporter headline declared “See You in 2025? Box Office May Take $2B Hit Next Year Amid Delays.”

But now the 2025 domestic box office is looking to be about flat with last year’s total; The LA Times reports that it’s expected to reach $8.87 billion, “barely above 2024 and more than 20% lower than pre-pandemic levels.”

Maybe it’s time to retire the phrases “pre- and post-pandemic” levels.

In reality, this was predictable. I wrote in July 2024 that while the release calendar would be fuller, there were plenty of big risks too, and questioned just how much promise this year actually had. At the time, I wrote:

“I’m of the mind that this is just the new normal; I’m not sure if the NA box office will ever again reach the highs of the record $11.9 billion it did in 2018. And it’s not just because of the strikes or the pandemic. People’s viewing habits have just plain shifted, and a movie’s success or failure is far more unpredictable. The bar has been lowered, and right now it’s at $9 billion.”

I’m far from an expert on exact box office figures, as my predictions for this year can attest. There are plenty of writers better at it than me. But I do follow this stuff closely, and used to report on it professionally. With this newsletter, I try to focus on franchises and fandom, so with that in mind: How did we get here?

The tried-and-true franchises that have sustained movie theaters for the last decade-plus aren’t performing like they used to. Superhero movies in particular just aren’t as reliable anymore unless they are eventized; none of Marvel’s three releases this year will even appear in the top 10 at the worldwide box office.

Superhero movies grossed a combined $7 billion worldwide in 2018, according to analyst David Gross, but this year, they’ll make $2 billion. Gross projects a rebound next year to over $3 billion, but still less than half of the “pre-pandemic level” (there I go again). There aren’t as many being released, and they aren’t making as much money. Maybe the new normal for superheroes reflects the new normal for the larger box office.

As I’ve written about before, other kinds of IP are filling the gap, namely video game movies. But there still aren’t enough to make up for the box office losses, despite “A Minecraft Movie” almost reaching $1 billion this year.

And while “Demon Slayer: Infinity Castle” grossed over $700 million globally, and performed impressively in North America as well, anime isn’t mainstream enough YET with casual US audiences to be reliable either.

There were individual wins this year, though, that shouldn’t be discounted, like “Sinners,” “Weapons,” and “F1,” which took original concepts (yes, “F1” had the benefit of a known brand) and delivered results. Even “One Battle After Another” made over $200 million worldwide.

That said, 2026 might be better — which was also predictable.

I also noted this in that piece from July ‘24: “If 2025 doesn’t live up to expectations, expect full-on panic — but also the spin that 2026 could be the year for things to get back on track.”

Indeed, here’s Variety now: “The 2025 results are a massive disappointment that no amount of spin can change. (Already there’s talk of how much better 2026 will be).”

2026 always showed more promise on paper than 2025, which I also wrote about in another piece last December:

“The 2025 IP-driven tentpoles on the calendar look much riskier than those set for 2026, a year that will see the return of a bevy of film brands with a proven ability to turn audiences out to theaters.”

There’s a Spider-Man, a Super Mario, and an Avengers coming in ‘26, all of which rank among Gen Alpha’s favorite franchises as young people drive theater attendance. There’s also a Star Wars (which is NOT ranked) and a new Christopher Nolan.

But a number of movies that were on the ‘26 slate when I wrote that piece have since been pushed to 2027 or removed from the calendar, including “The Batman Part 2,” “Fast and Furious 11,” “Shrek 5,” “Ice Age 6,” and Jordan Peele’s next movie.

Also, Paramount just removed the animated “Legend of Aang: The Last Airbender” movie from the theatrical release calendar in favor of making it a Paramount+ exclusive. Seems dumb considering A. Paramount is trying to show a commitment to theaters as it tries to buy Warner Bros. and B. As I noted above, anime (or in this case, anime-inspired) has a lot of potential at the movies and a ravenous fanbase.

So maybe 2026 will be more of the same after all? And then the year after that and after that and…

Oh, and this doesn’t even take into account what will happen with WB. Happy New Year?

What I’m into this week

• I finally caught “Zootopia 2” while I was visiting family for Christmas. It’s delightful.

• I watched the 1960 classic “The Apartment” for the first time this week. It’s stellar, and kind of an under-the-radar Christmas AND New Year’s movie.

• I hope the “Pluribus” season finale quieted the haters. I’m hyped for season two.

• I got the Clint Eastwood biography “Clint” by Shawn Levy and a new book on the “Fast and Furious” franchise, “Welcome to the Family” by Barry Hertz. Excited to dive into both.

Beyond the Traverse

💬 DC says that its Absolute line of comics has sold over 8 million units, with Absolute Batman accounting for about 3 million.

🐈‍⬛ Ryan Coogler shared details on his initial plan for the “Black Panther” sequel, including T’Challa’s 8-year-old son.

🎢 The Wall Street Journal reports on the strategy for theme parks: A “high-end middle market.”

The Gist

• While sequels and reboots still dominated the box office in 2025, it was also a good year for some original genre movies.

• This is my second-annual awards to recognize how movies encouraged excitement for cinema-going.

• They include “Sinners,” “F1,” “A Minecraft Movie,” “Weapons,” and more.

Last year when I introduced these “awards,” it was in response to the Golden Globes’ “Cinematic and Box Office Achievement,” and how ridiculous it was.

It didn’t disappoint this year, nominating “Avatar: Fire and Ash” before it had even been released to theaters, and “KPop Demon Hunters,” a Netflix movie that was in theaters for two weekends and did not report official box office numbers.

So this is my attempt at recognizing inspiring box office stories and movies that encouraged excitement to, well, go to the movies.

Let’s get to it:

Achievement in Event Release or Re-Release Awards a non-traditional theatrical release or a release for a previously distributed film.

• Jaws 50th Anniversary

• KPop Demon Hunters Sing-Along

• Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith 20th Anniversary*

• Taylor Swift: Life of a Showgirl Release Party

Netflix’s stunt with “KPop Demon Hunters” — releasing it in select theaters for a sing-along event two months after it had already been on Netflix — was impressive, reportedly grossing nearly $20 million in one weekend. But “Revenge of the Sith,” a 20-year-old movie, earned $25 million in its first weekend of re-release and over $40 million worldwide, proving it has officially been reclaimed by fans.

Comeback IP, Brand, or Genre of the Year Awards a film that revitalized audience excitement for a dormant or struggling IP, brand, or genre.

• The Conjuring (The Conjuring: Last Rites)

• DC (Superman)*

• Final Destination (Final Destination: Bloodlines)

• Predator (Predator: Badlands)

DC movies were all but dead before “Superman.” Two years ago, Warner Bros. released four of them, all of which flopped after a string of previous misses. Last year, the “Joker” sequel became one of the most disastrous box office collapses of all time. But James Gunn has revived the brand, with “Superman” earning over $600 million worldwide, including $354 million domestically.

Comeback Talent of the Year Awards a filmmaker or performer that experienced a career revival.

• Danny Boyle (28 Years Later)

• Lindsay Lohan (Freakier Friday)

• Liam Neeson (The Naked Gun)*

Ever since “Taken,” it seems like Liam Neeson has been riding a wave of mediocre, one-word action thrillers; this decade alone he’s starred in flops like “Memory,” “Blacklight,” and “Retribution.” With “The Naked Gun,” he finally got over the hump by spoofing those very kind of movies. While it wasn’t a mega hit, it cracked $100 million globally, over half of which came from the US, no small feat for any comedy at the box office these days.

Achievement in Film Marketing Awards a film’s promotional campaign that utilized unique platforms and tactics.

• A Minecraft Movie*

• F1

• Lilo and Stitch

• Superman

• Zootopia 2

Warner Bros. replicated its “Barbie” marketing blitz for “A Minecraft Movie,” collaborating with dozens of brands, but with a more interactive edge to interest young players of the game. And it worked. The movie made $958 million worldwide, and is the top grosser domestically of the year, with only “Avatar: Fire and Ash” left to potentially topple it. Its success was overwhelmingly powered by Gen Z and Alpha.

Special Box Office Achievement (micro-to-small budget) Awards a film that showed commercial success off of a production budget below $20 million.

• Clown in a Cornfield

• The King of Kings

• One of Them Days*

If the theatrical comedy is dead, don’t tell SZA and Keke Palmer. The duo over-delivered with “One of Them Days,” which earned over $50 million just in the US and was made for $14 million.

Special Box Office Achievement (small-to-medium budget) Awards a film that showed commercial success off of a production budget anywhere from $20 million to $50 million.

• Final Destination: Bloodlines

• Weapons*

• The Black Phone 2

Zach Cregger’s “Weapons,” his follow up to 2022’s “Barbarian,” made nearly six times more than that movie ($270 million worldwide to be exact), and did it with a medium budget of around $40 million

Special Box Office Achievement (medium-to-big budget) Awards a film that showed commercial success off of a production budget between $50 million and $100 million.

• 28 Years Later

• The Conjuring: Last Rites

• Sinners*

“Sinners” was one of the most talked about movies of the year. When it first debuted, it sparked headlines, and then backlash, over whether its box office opening was good enough and if it would “turn a profit.” With a budget of $90 million, it grossed $368 million worldwide, including $280 million in the US (76% of its earnings). Sounds good enough to me.

Special Box Office Achievement (big budget) Awards a film that showed commercial success off of a production budget above $100 million.

• A Minecraft Movie

• Avatar: Fire and Ash

• Zootopia 2*

“Fire and Ash” is currently steamrolling the box office, proving the naysayers wrong. But “Zootopia 2” has reached over $1.4 billion since opening last month and won’t slow down any time soon. That includes a whopping $560 million in China alone, the second-biggest Hollywood movie there of all time, behind only “Avengers: Endgame.”

Achievement in Box Office Outside of North America Awards a film that earned the vast majority or an impressive amount of its box office from international markets.

• Avatar: Fire and Ash

• F1*

• Jurassic World Rebirth

• Now You See Me: Now You Don’t

• Zootopia 2

At $631 million globally, “F1” beat out the likes of “Superman,” all three MCU movies, “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,” and likely “Wicked: For Good.” Seventy percent of that gross came from international markets, showing the power of the Formula 1 brand outside the US.

Achievement for an International Production Awards an international film that earned an impressive amount in the US.

This is a new award I’m introducing this year, and I’m skipping the nominees. “Demon Slayer: Infinity Castle” showed everyone that Japanese anime can go mainstream at the US box office with $134 million.

The Long Legs Award Awards a film that showed impressive consistency at the box office after its opening weekend.

• Avatar: Fire and Ash

• F1

• Sinners*

• Superman

• Weapons

After opening with an impressive $48 million in the US, “Sinners” went on to earn nearly six times that domestically. In its second weekend, it dropped just 5% with $45 million. That was the best second-weekend hold for a movie that opened over $40 million since “Avatar” in 2009.

Movie Star of the Year Awards a performer that inspired moviegoing excitement both on and off screen.

• Jack Black (A Minecraft Movie, Anaconda)*

• Timothee Chalamet (Marty Supreme)

• Tom Cruise (Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning)

• Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande (Wicked: For Good)

• Michael B Jordan (Sinners)

My winner in this category last year, Chalemet, just propelled A24 to one of its best opening weekends with “Marty Supreme,” besting Black’s “Anaconda.” But Black proved once again this year with “A Minecraft Movie,” after he did so with “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” that he is able to add some additional star power to even the most recognizable IP. He’s a cross-generation movie star now, no small feat.

Filmmaker of the Year Awards a director that inspired moviegoing excitement both on and off screen.

• James Cameron (Avatar: Fire and Ash)

• Ryan Coogler (Sinners)*

• Zach Cregger (Weapons)

• James Gunn (Superman)

• Joseph Kosinksi (F1)

Coogler’s aspect ratio breakdown (below) is genuine and cool, providing an engaging lesson in filmmaking to even those that couldn’t care less. Sure, Cameron just wrapped an all-timer of a press tour, but Coogler’s passion is hard to deny, and “Sinners” cemented him as a “brand” filmmaker — someone that can get butts in seats thanks to their name — a current class that includes Chris Nolan, Jordan Peele, and Greta Gerwig.

Distributor of the Year Awards a film studio that showed a special commitment to the theatrical experience.

• Angel Studios (The King of Kings, David)

• Crunchyroll (Demon Slayer: Infinity Castle, Chainsaw Man — The Movie: Reze Arc)

• Disney (Avatar: Fire and Ash, Lilo and Stitch, Zootopia 2)

• Universal (How to Train Your Dragon, Jurassic World Rebirth, Wicked: For Good)

• Warner Bros. (A Minecraft Movie, The Conjuring: Last Rites, Final Destination: Bloodlines, Sinners, Superman, Weapons)*

Could be any other studio? WB might currently find itself in the midst of a wild bidding war, but let’s put all that aside and just appreciate its box office run this year. Yeah, Disney will make more money in total. But WB was more consistent across a variety of genres, and could even cap it off with a best picture Oscar (“One Battle After Another,” by the way, wasn’t too shabby either for an adult drama, with $200 million worldwide).

Movie of the Year Awards the film with the most compelling box-office story of the year and contributed meaningful business to the theatrical industry.

• A Minecraft Movie

• Avatar: Fire and Ash

• F1

• Sinners*

• Weapons

Last year I did give the top award to the biggest (“Inside Out 2”) movie because it seemed so undeniable. But “Sinners” feels undeniable too for different reasons. An original movie that grossed $280 million domestically ($367 million globally). It encouraged diverse demographics at the movies (nearly half of its opening weekend audience were Black moviegoers). It’s the kind of movie that Hollywood should not only be making more of, but that theaters and audiences alike should want to see succeed.