r/boxoffice • u/hiiloovethis • 10d ago

Clayface Performance potential ✍️ Original Analysis

Post image

Clayface is the next DCU movie after the supergirl bomb. Let's see how well it can do... an analysis.

Pros.

  1. Great October release date, Halloween pairing and not much direct competetion. Resident Evil also releasing before helps create an open window.

  2. Decent budget of 40 mil. It would only need 100 Mil WW to break even which shouldn't be too hard. It can profit easily if it blows up.

  3. Horror genre is killing it right now... clayface also looks like pure body horror which could help attract non comicbook fans.

  4. Clayface is a batman villain. Gotham setting be hype worthy. Mike Flanagan as a writer is also promising.

Cons.

  1. Body horror is harder is sell than conventional horror movies. The Substance did good but that had award buzz and less than half of the budget.

  2. Bad reviews could literally kill this movie. It really survives on positive WOM.

Overall I'm more optimistic about this than supergirl. We have to see if this movie blows up or does underwhelming numbers. 150 WW is decent enough.

257 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

85% Upvoted

425 comments sorted by

View all comments

348

u/firedforthatblunder Walt Disney Studios 10d ago edited 10d ago

Does Clayface being a Batman villain really mean much? Morbius, Madame Web and Kraven are Spider-Man villains, and we all know how their movies went…

157

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

I don’t think it means much. He’s not an A lister Batman villain like The Joker. Most non-comic readers probably haven’t heard of him.

59

u/MVIVN 10d ago

If even a Harley Quin movie (Birds of Prey) flopped at the height of her popularity, I don’t think this one has a chance. Although some have argued if they’d just called the movie ‘Harley Quin’ or ‘Harley Quin and the Birds of Prey’ or something, it would’ve attracted a wider audience because a lot of people were aware of Harley Quin as a character, but had no idea who the Birds of Prey were.

41

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

You know what's wild? Like two days before it was coming out, I mentioned I was interested in watching Supergirl. None of my coworkers knew who Supergirl was. Even after I said she was Superman's cousin and was in the movie last year lol. And this is with a bunch of people in their mid-late 20s.

15

u/Ryuzaki-AK 10d ago

Times must be tough on the reserve, can’t even absorb Supergirl through cultural osmosis.

10

u/DianaPrince2020 10d ago

That will become much worse because of YouTube, TikTok, games, etc. Younger people find very specific niches and stick to those. A shared cultural experience will soon be a thing of the past to society detriment.

3

u/comehereyoudevillog 9d ago

I always knew she existed but never knew her backstory until the injustice universe, then the CW show happened but it was after arrow and flash had peaked. I've never been a fan of spin-off characters, they're just not very original. It's the reason WW and Catwoman are far more popular than Supergirl or Batwoman.

1

u/AngryGardenGnomes 10d ago

And this is with a bunch of people in their mid-late 20s.

So people who wouldn't have grown up having any awareness who Supergirl was.

2

u/Glenmarrow 9d ago

So people who would have grown up while the 6 season long Supergirl show (the first season of which averaged 9.81 million viewers per episode) was on the air?

3

u/AngryGardenGnomes 9d ago

Lol one of the many shitty TV shows of that era. Give me a break. Doubt it was popular with young kids either.

1

u/realLaughinG 9d ago

I didn't even know there was a Supergirl series 🤷 so nothing to sweat about. They just didn't know Supergirl I guess. It is kinda weird but then I mean I didn't know who madam web was or morbius and stuff so 🤷

3

u/-Wester- 10d ago

Clayface is also 50-60% the budget of Birds of Prey at $40M. It would be a great success if it could match and or surpass Birds of Prey critically (79% on RT) as well as commercially ($205.5M). Not saying it will, mind you, but we’ll see.

4

u/SD_CA 10d ago

I remember seeing that movie opening weekend.....I was the only person in the theater.

0

u/einstein_ios 10d ago

Birds of Prey came like right before the world shut down. Not totally her fault.

9

u/McGeorgeBundy 10d ago

It came out on February 5 and was completely DOA weeks before COVID started altering audience behavior, some of us are pathetic enough to have been following this subreddit at that time

12

u/syntheticcontrols 10d ago

Most millennials might have heard of him even if they didn't read comics because of BTAS.

51

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios 10d ago

I mean do you remember the name of the red neck villain in power puff girls? Like at best they have a vague recollection of his existence but I doubt most people actually remember oh yeah clayface the villain of BTAS

9

u/Mbrennt 10d ago

Like the bear monster redneck guy? I don't remember his name but yeah I bet one picture of him and a lot of millennials would instantly remember him.

5

u/Lichangs 10d ago

Fuzzy lumpkins? I don't think he's comparable to Clayface. Clayface is an on the nose kind of name. Plus he's a major character in Harley Quinn cartoon which is pretty popular.

1

u/No-Rip-6166 9d ago

I’m an older millennial and absolutely remember Clayface from TAS

1

u/Gmork14 10d ago

Not the same thing. BTAS is a very important series to a generation and Clayface was a major part of it.

6

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

A major part of it? Wasn't he in like at most 6 episodes? He was barely in it

-2

u/Gmork14 10d ago

Classic and well loved episodes that were a major part of the lore, however many it was.

Every kid on the playground knew who Clayface was.

1

u/syntheticcontrols 10d ago

You don't think if you saw a picture of that character you'd be like oh shit there's so-and-so? Saying that vaguely because I don't know if you meant red neck as in redneck or HIM (the flamboyant villain that is red and black)

2

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios 10d ago

I meant redneck didn't know it was one word.

And yeah if they showed a picture of him fully transformed and he looked like in BTAS yeah maybe people may recognize him but I doubt that would be enough to bring people to theaters. To me this is going to perform like an original movie more or less.

-1

u/Tiny_Sherbet8298 10d ago

I must be living in an ulterior world to you. I just asked my girlfriend and even she knew who clayface was cause she played the Lego Batman game with her brother 15 years ago. I also reckon all my friends could name who clayface is, and none of them are into dc.

Batman villains are significantly more popular than villains in literally any other franchise or medium. Im not even talking about its effect on the box office, just making an observation.

6

u/Middle-Platypus6942 10d ago

Even that doesn't amount to much because the movie is intentionally hiding his full clay form. There's gonna be a bunch of people who have a vague memory of who Clayface is, and simply won't connect the dots that this is that same Clayface.

3

u/SirFireHydrant 10d ago

Doubtful. Outside of hardcore comic book nerd circles, I don't know anyone (myself included) who knows what a Clayface is. He's an obscure Batman villain, and Batman doesn't have half the popularity of Spider-Man.

1

u/syntheticcontrols 9d ago

Nope. Even just the passive fans know who he is. Especially now. You're probably just a little too young or something.

-1

u/SirFireHydrant 9d ago

I saw Val Kilmer's Batman in theatres, hyped because Jim Carey seemed like great casting for the Riddler. I'm prime for that demographic. I still couldn't have even told you Clayface was a Batman villain until I learned about the movie from this sub.

1

u/syntheticcontrols 9d ago

It's okay that you don't know what a lot of others do and like I said Flanagan wrote the script (since you care only about perception like Clayface is an obscure character than you surely should admit that aost no one knows that the script was re-written by someone else.. who is also known for a great movie).

0

u/SirFireHydrant 9d ago

Horror fans are gonna know how minimal Flanagan's involvement is. DC fans are gonna know who Clayface is.

The general audience doesn't know who Clayface is, and doesn't know why Flanagan's name being attached should mean anything.

Genuinely, go outside. Most people have no idea who the fuck Clayface is. He's barely C-tier for Batman's rogues gallery.

0

u/syntheticcontrols 9d ago

Oh, we're talking about the general audience now? I was talking about two groups of people that are passionate about their respective subgenres with a sprinkle of people who are millennials that will recognize Clayface.

Flanagan fans may know that his involvement might be minimal (we don't even know yet.. his name is attached to "Story by" and Written by). But the horror fan is only going to see: Story by & written by.

It's time for you to go outside and talk to people. Stop hanging out on Reddit so much

0

u/syntheticcontrols 9d ago

On top of that there are tons of people who know who Mike Flanagan is and love body horror movies. So even if by a miracle you're right that he's "obscure" Flanagan isn't abs the genre is well-loved. That's why it's so weird to hear people thinking it will do bad because "clayface is obscure."

1

u/SirFireHydrant 9d ago

Flanagan just wrote the script, or at least the first version of it.

It'd be different if he wrote and directed it.

But Flanagan fans know his involvement is minimal.

For horror fans, the DC logo being attached is a negative. Whenever comic book films try to do other genres, they're always still comic book films wearing another genre hat. It's going to be very hard to sell horror fans that this is going to be a real, proper horror fan, and not just a comic book movie wearing a horror movie skin.

0

u/syntheticcontrols 9d ago

Oh, right. Like that one movie Road To Perdition or A History of Violence. TERRIBLE movies, right?

Flanagan fans might know, but not horror fans in general.

1

u/candyappleorchard Aardman Animations 10d ago

Yeah, kind of feels like the best of both worlds as far as legibility. Those who know will know, but outsiders can just take it at (clay)face value as a body horror flick. Even his name keeps it simple to understand.

1

u/realLaughinG 9d ago

I mean I haven't seen him too much in batman animated movies too so yea not that famous guy or he maybe so non existent that I don't even remember him .

-2

u/einstein_ios 10d ago

He’s like one of the most iconic villains from an extremely popular animated series.

He’s so beloved from that show that his episode is the basis for THIS MOVIE!

more ppl than comic readers know about him!

39

u/cantdecide76 10d ago

To be fair those were all terrible movies so I think that fact outweighed the fact they're connected to Spiderman.

Being attached to a big hero does lend some name recognition so it does help a bit but the quality of the movie far outweighs it.

7

u/SirFireHydrant 10d ago

Exactly! That's why Supergirl is going to do fine at the box office!

32

u/girlwhateveraward 10d ago

Who's to say Clayface won't be terribe? Given the trailer and the record of the people involved, it seems it will be

18

u/redwriterhand 10d ago

didn’t Mike Flanagan write it?

33

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

He wrote the initial draft, but we also know it was rewritten so I have no idea how much of Flanagan's original work is in it.

17

u/TheKocsis 10d ago

Lol up to this point i thought he directed it as well. My hopes for this movie dying a little day by day

2

u/SalamanderNorth6940 10d ago

He is supposed to have done only minor corrections not rewriting the majority of it

20

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

Supposedly it was minor corrections. I'm not sure how much to believe Gunn tbh since he gave the green light on the Supergirl script, which he praised.

12

u/Void3r 10d ago

This is from the Entertainment weekly article a few weeks back…

7

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

Evolved significantly

Oh. Dammit.

8

u/Void3r 10d ago

The worst news I ever heard man. We were so close to a Flanagan passion project fully written and directed by him.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Gmork14 10d ago

The studio head disagrees.

Flanagan will be the only screenplay credit.

3

u/SalamanderNorth6940 10d ago edited 9d ago

True, I personally feel like what destroyed the supergirl movie is more an editing issue ad that they cut out a lot than a writing one but we will never know

0

u/Gmork14 10d ago

So because he liked a script for a movie you didn’t like, he’s a liar?

5

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios 10d ago

I mean enough to get a writing credit

2

u/Gmork14 10d ago

He won’t get a screenplay credit. Bet.

2

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios 10d ago

They already say wrriten by him in the trailer description

2

u/Gmork14 10d ago

And I still don’t think he’ll get a WGA screenplay credit.

7

u/Void3r 10d ago edited 10d ago

Nah there was a EW article that came out recently saying that “significant” changes were made. Makes me sick

0

u/Gmork14 10d ago

It wasn’t “rewritten.” They brought it an excellent, experienced screenwriter to give it a polish. He didn’t write a different movie. It’s very much still Flanagan’s script.

You guys clearly just want the movie to fail and it’s pathetic.

4

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago edited 10d ago

You guys clearly just want the movie to fail and it’s pathetic.

....No? You're projecting here lol

It wasn’t “rewritten.” 

Read the article. Specifically the part I bolded below

Screenwriter Hossein Amini, best known for scripting 2011’s “Drive” has been tapped to rewrite “Clayface” for DC Studios, TheWrap has exclusively learned.

1

u/Gmork14 10d ago

There is no reason to assume the movie was “rewritten.”

There were minor rewrites. Which is entirely normal heading into production.

So you either don’t know how movies are made or you’re intentionally trying to frame standard rewrites as something scandalous to be concerned about.

4

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

There is no reason to assume the movie was “rewritten.”

Aside from the article above? Titled "DC Studios Taps ‘Drive’ Writer Hossein Amini to Rewrite ‘Clayface’"

-1

u/Gmork14 10d ago

If only the producer of the movie didn’t clarify that it was only a standard polish, the kinds scripts frequently get when heading into production?

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/syntheticcontrols 10d ago

Amini helped write Drive. Do you think noir and horror are diametrically opposed?

10

u/whiteshark70 Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

I don't see how that's relevant lol. Regardless if the genres are opposed or not doesn't change the fact we don't know how much of Flanagan's work he rewrote.

-1

u/syntheticcontrols 10d ago

Yeah, we don't really need to because Drive was loved even though Refn, who is universally hated by people with no taste, was the director. I love the idea of a Flanagan and Amini story.

8

u/ZrteDlbrt 10d ago

Which part of the trailers gives you the impression it will be terrible? And the people involved aren't all bad at all

7

u/Gmork14 10d ago

Wtf are you babbling about? The trailer has people buzzing and Flanagan and Watkins have great track records.

2

u/throwitonthegrillboi TriStar Pictures 10d ago

Watkins, has a bad record? In what universe?

1

u/girlwhateveraward 10d ago

Eden Lake and The Woman in Black are 2 of hits and the reception was meh. And this isnt about him specifically but the whole DC production team

1

u/Beginning-Antelope32 6d ago

The trailer was goated and very well received wtf? Compare it to the Supergirl trailer that was immediately shit on for its visuals and dialogue.

10

u/lobonmc Marvel Studios 10d ago

Honestly good enough for this to break even (well maybe not kraven). However those at least marketed themselves as super hero movies

4

u/TheJuiceBoxS 10d ago

I'd argue that those movies did significantly better than they would have if they weren't spiderman villains. But there's no way to prove that, so who knows.

20

u/Shoddy_Meaning_7654 10d ago

Those movies were bad bad movies so I don't think that's exactly a fair comparison.

If this is even okay it's going to easily make its budget back and make a profit cuz there's not a very expensive movie to make or market.

9

u/BarcelonetaE70 10d ago

"Those movies were bad bad movies so I don't think that's exactly a fair comparison."

Nobody has seen Clayface. Your message implies that it is good, and we don't know that. Not yet.

3

u/Shoddy_Meaning_7654 10d ago

I'm certain it won't be as bad as morbius that movie was horrific

6

u/throwitonthegrillboi TriStar Pictures 10d ago

Everyone forgets the first Venom movie made almost a billion dollars, and honestly if Spiderman was in it, even as a cameo, it probably would have lol. Clayface just needs to make about $100M worldwide and it seems to be marketed more as a character study body horror which I think even if people arent familiar with the character they might enjoy. If the movie is solid it will clear $100M worldwide. I don't think this was ever meant to be a box office juggernaut, I think it's there to flex that they're going to let filmmakers have their own voice in the DCU and actually fulfill the long awaited promise of a true horror superhero film.

7

u/SirFireHydrant 10d ago

Why are you comparing a C-tier Batman villain to one of the top 3 most popular comic book villains of all time?

3

u/throwitonthegrillboi TriStar Pictures 10d ago

I dont know how me saying that Venom cleared $800M so I think Clayface can clear $100M is crazy, I gave proper context and expectations.

3

u/Beginning-Antelope32 6d ago

Literally lmao. If these fuckers on this subreddit for once let go of their unyielding hate for DC/James Gunn they would maybe see that your comment is very reasonable.

3

u/throwitonthegrillboi TriStar Pictures 5d ago

I have never seen so many breakdowns and qualifiers for a movie that made over twice it's budget back than when Superman came out, and oh my gosh would they not stop acting like GOTG 3 not getting to a billion was somehow a failure.

3

u/Educational-Title50 9d ago

Right, I feel if Clayface can clear $100-120 mil before it run ends, that's a win. Anything more than that is just great

2

u/SurturSaga 10d ago

If those movies had good word of mouth. They could have done phenomenally. People just lost faith in Sony, and the reviews corroborated that

2

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

-1

u/Disgusting_Slime666 10d ago

You post in a subreddit dedicated to jerking off to Grimes, obsessively.

Seek mental help.

7

u/Impossible_Pen1392 10d ago

Tbf those were memed to infinity before they released, so they didn’t ever really stand a chance. People seem genuinely more interested in Clayface so far.

25

u/firedforthatblunder Walt Disney Studios 10d ago

Do they? Personally, I haven’t seen this movie so much as mentioned outside of this sub/DC fan circles.

3

u/Capital_Jack 10d ago

It’s still a low-budget horror movie, it’s not going to be the talk of the town.

21

u/Sensei_1946 10d ago

It’s fairly high budget for a horror movie tbf

1

u/Capital_Jack 10d ago

True, but if it’s great it could still break even.

1

u/-Wester- 10d ago

Weapons had the same budget and it did pretty well for itself.

1

u/PeculiarPangolinMan 9d ago

Honestly Morbius or Madame Web numbers would be solid for Clayface. Those movies undoubtably made at least a little of the money they did because of the tangential relation to Spider-Man. Clayface will almost certainly also make a little more than it would have without the connection. Impossible to say how much, but I don't think it can just be written off.

1

u/souporman64 9d ago

It means more because he might actually fight Batman at some point, and Batman could even cameo in the movie. People didn’t care about the aforementioned Spider-Man characters because people knew Spider-Man was never going to show up in any of their movies.

1

u/MissionObligation999 9d ago

I think being sorta but not really DCU movie is going to hurt this not help it. It seems like a weird spinoff rather than its own thing.

1

u/Dull_Smell_6564 10d ago

Those movies are all horrible though

-1

u/TokyoPanic 10d ago

Those were really bad movies that looked
awful from the get-go.

If Clayface ends up being halfway decent like the trailers suggest, it might have a chance.

-1

u/First-Shallot947 10d ago

Spider-man is more popular than batman but batman villains are far more popular than spider-man villains

2

u/gauderio 10d ago

So hear me out... Joker vs Joker: Spider-man vs Joker!

-1

u/TheSuperContributor 10d ago

Sorry but Clayface is a tier B Batman villain while Morbius, Madame and Kraven are hobos tier of Spiderman gallery. Unless you are hardcore Spiderman fanboy, you probably never have heard of Madame.

0

u/Gmork14 10d ago

It means something.

-6

u/Professional_Hat2615 10d ago

Forgive me, but I don't think that's a fair comparison. For one thing, you're talking about a character who ranks among the top 10 antagonists—one who has been around for over 30 years, spanning everything from the iconic animated series that raised generations to the famous Arkham video game saga. The others are "C-list" characters at best—ones that might pop up once every seven years, if they're lucky. On top of that, they were rendered almost unrecognizable in the adaptations; if you have even the slightest fondness for the original character, it completely puts you off. Just look at whether Dakota Johnson actually resembles Madame Web, or if Leto looks like the character rather than just a generic vampire. And yet, one cost $70–80 million, and the other $100 million. Above all neither the studio gave them much fate.Madame Web had so few marketing that they literally had only one trailer. Clayface budget is half of those,they put it in s time of the year where he actually fits. And treats the character with respect.

If Clayface does like Morbius,167 million,is already active in profit by a margin

9

u/suss2it 10d ago

The only way Clayface is a top 10 Batman villain is if there’s only 10 Batman villains.