Q. With all the reports about “Superman” finally being test-screened by an audience, what have you been hearing? (Matt Boehner)
There's the old claim that test screenings don't make a movie. Still, It’s interesting how James Gunn and Warner Bros have allowed “Superman” to test so openly given the inevitable leaks that could occur, not to mention the risk of having negative reactions pummeling advanced hype.
Yes, a few days ago, “Superman” had its first non-internal test screening — I only spoke to a few attendees. Suffice it to say, they both felt underwhelmed by Gunn’s film, and I'm being kind here. No need to taint the film further.
Now, reporting on two people who didn’t like “Superman” doesn't mean much in terms of quality. I've heard of people being turned off by the inherent humor, and silliness, that comes with a James Gunn movie — which Superman seems to have in spades.
So far, based on what’s leaked, we've had the usual “scoopers” weighing on the reactions. MyTimeToShineHello says the reactions were “decidedly mixed.” According to “insider” Daniel Richtman, people he spoke to “loved it.”
Yesterday, scooper ViewerAnon shared, "The response I heard directly from Warner Bros was decidedly less glowing than Daniel [Richtman]'s post. Not to say it went terribly, but it’s a divisive film with a particularly silly tone. Some people click with it, some seem to bounce right off."
A few weeks ago, a report indicated that “Superman,” or at least the cut shown on the Warner lot, was “kind of a mess.” It went on to say that Warner was starting to get “nervous” about the film.
They should be “nervous.” If “Superman” fails then Gunn’s planned DCU might crumble alongside it. Warner Bros. has invested a lot of money in this film, rumored to approach the $300M mark, and they’re betting all of their chips on it. Forget about “Mickey 17,” and “One Battle After Another”; for Warner Bros, the future begins and ends with “Superman.”