Advertisements

Movies that were supposed to launch franchises (but didn’t): Unbreakable

Unbreakable

When Unbreakable was released in 2000, writer-director M. Night Shyamalan was riding high.  His previous movie, the supernatural thriller The Sixth Sense, had been a surprise smash.  On a modest $40 million dollar budget, The Sixth Sense became the second-highest grossing movie of 1999 right behind The Phantom Menace.  But unlike the Star Wars prequel, The Sixth Sense also enjoyed critical success as well.  It was also nominated for six Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay.

After his second movie as a director, Shyamalan was a Hollywood power player.  Disney, which had released The Sixth Sense, couldn’t wait to make more movies with their new superstar.  He was paid a record-breaking $5 million dollars for a spec script for Unbreakable in addition to another $5 million in directing fees.  That is a quarter of what it cost to make The Sixth Sense.  But if Shyamalan’s follow-up was even half as successful as that movie, it would be money well spent.

Like a lot of Shyamalan’s movies, Unbreakable was shrouded in secrecy.  The previous year, it was considered blasphemous to spoil the twist ending of The Sixth Sense.  When it came to Unbreakable, audiences weren’t even allowed to know which genre the movie belonged to.  The posters for the movie featured images of shattered glass.  The trailer indicated that Bruce Willis – the star of The Sixth Sense – was the sole survivor of a train crash he should not have walked away from.  Given that information, it’s understandable that a lot of ticket buyers assumed that this movie was another supernatural thriller – a spiritual sequel to The Sixth Sense.

Unbreakable did have a lot in common with Shyamalan’s previous film.  Both movies were somber and moody.  Both featured Willis giving a minimalist dramatic performance.  Both were character driven with long stretches of silence and both movies had surprise endings.  But the twist in Unbreakable wasn’t a mind-bending revelation that changed the context of the entire movie up until that point.  Instead, Shyamalan revealed that he had made a secret superhero movie.

Today is the 15th anniversary of the release of Unbreakable.  So if you are still avoiding spoilers, oops.  I sort of let the cat out of the bag.  But if you want to avoid reading details of the story, now would be a good time to turn back.

Jackson - Unbreakable

At the time, conventional wisdom was that no one would go to see a superhero movie.  There had been a few high profile flops in the late 90’s and the superhero genre was still a couple of years from becoming dominant.  Disney, which now makes nothing but Marvel movies and Star Wars, was worried that if audiences realized Shyamalan had made a movie about comic books, they wouldn’t buy tickets.  According to Shyamalan:

I remember when I made it, Disney was literally like, ‘Comic books?! There’s no market for comic books!’ That’s all they make now! It was a hilarious conversation.

Shyamalan has said that he originally conceived Unbreakable using a three-act structure.  The first act would be the traditional origin story.  In the middle chapter, the hero hones his skills fighting a general threat.  And in the final act, there is an ultimate battle between the hero and his arch enemy.  Ultimately, he deiced to concentrate on the birth of the hero for the first movie.

This is where things can get a little frustrating.  Shyamalan has gone on record as saying that he was not thinking of Unbreakable as the beginning of a trilogy, but he has also said that there was more story to tell and on several occasions he, Willis and Jackson have talked about planned sequels.  So the degree to which a franchise was planned is open to debate.  I think it’s pretty clear that this wasn’t like a modern superhero movie where sequels were expected.  But I also think that everyone involved was hoping for a Sixth Sense-sized hit that could be spun off into a trilogy.

Unbreakable

There is a perception out there that Unbreakable was not successful.  It certainly wasn’t as successful as Shyamalan’s breakout movie.  But that’s a mighty high bar to clear.  Generally speaking, critics agreed that while Unbreakable wasn’t as good as The Sixth Sense, it was still a good movie.  Why didn’t it click with audiences?

I think you can look at Disney’s vague marketing strategy for this one.  There was a mystery around The Sixth Sense, but audiences knew from the trailer that it was about a kid who sees dead people.  That’s a clear concept.  A ticket buyer can decide whether or not they want to go see a spooky ghost story in which Bruce Willis tries to help a scared little boy.  The twist ending wasn’t initially the movie’s selling point.  It was a bonus that gave the movie incredible word of mouth.

Unbreakable didn’t have that – at least not in its marketing.  The story is a pretty straight-forward superhero origin story albeit one with a middle-aged protagonist and a lot of moping.  There’s obviously an audience for stories about guys who discover they have super powers, but that’s not the movie Disney wanted to sell.

They wanted people to think that Unbreakable was another Sixth Sense which it obviously wasn’t.  So people who bought a ticket expecting another creepy supernatural story were obviously disappointed.  And people who might have been interested in seeing a superhero movie in the days before the genre dominated the box office didn’t know they what they were missing.

Ultimately, Unbreakable didn’t live up to studio expectations.  It opened in second place behind the holiday smash, How the Grinch Stole Christmas and ended up grossing about a third of what The Sixth Sense did.  Granted, that was still nearly $100 million dollars.  But Disney had expected a lot more from their new wunderkind.  When Shyamalan pitched them on a follow-up, Disney passed.

Shyamalan’s next movie, Signs, was another massive hit at the box office which seemed to suggest that the writer-director had gotten passed his sophomore slump.  But Shyamalan’s next movie, The Village, would be his final movie for Disney and it was another disappointment.  This lead to a messy break-up between the auteur and the studio.  Shyamalan ended up at Warner Brothers where he made the critical and commercial flop, Lady in the Water.  Disney breathed a sigh of relief that they had cut ties when they did.

Even now, fifteen years after the release of a movie that didn’t live up to expectations, there’s still talk about the potential for a sequel.  Shyamalan’s career has cooled to the point where modest success doesn’t seem so disappointing anymore.  And Unbreakable has built up enough of a fanbase on video that audiences would know what they were signing up for.  It certainly helps that the superhero genre has become more popular than ever before.  Earlier this year, Shyamalan expressed his ideas for Unbreakable 2:

It feels like a straight-up drama. It’s real. You’re confronting the possibility that comic book characters were based on people that were real. That’s the premise, so the tone has to be super grounded. It would be cool.

More Movies that were supposed to…

Advertisements

Posted on November 14, 2015, in Movies, movies that were supposed to... and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 13 Comments.

  1. They called me Mr. Glass!

    Like

  2. I always preferred Unbreakable to The Sixth Sense. The story was more original and more engaging. Th twist, while entertaining, was not the focal point. This one holds up better to repeat viewings. With The Sixth Sense, once you know the plot twist, there’s no reason to go back.

    Like

    • I have always thought Unbreakable was under-rated, but I’ll still take The Sixth Sense over it. I have watched The Sixth Sense a few times and still get enjoyment out of it. A lot of folks ran out and saw it a second time just to make sure the movie didn’t cheat. Unbreakable’s biggest fault to me is its pacing. It’s too deconstructed. I have a hard time sitting through the whole thing again knowing that just when the comic book stuff comes into play the movie is going to end.

      There are some who accuse Shyamalan of ripping of Matt Wagner’s Mage comic book. “Original” is always a relative term in Hollywood. 😉

      Like

  3. I think that today most critics and people with a decent knowledge of his filmography consider Unbreakable the best movie he’s made. Rank it among my favorite superhero movies for sure. Definitely top 10, maybe even in the top 5. Back when the movies came out Unbreakable was underappreciated so I’d bet the reviews of the time reflect that. But I think hindsight often gives the best perspective on things like this.

    Sixth Sense had the best twist no doubt. Probably in the the all time top three with Darth Vader being Luke’s father and the identity of Tyler Durden in Fight Club. However, once you know the twist Sixth Sense isn’t that phenomenal.

    I’m so happy they didn’t make sequels. Even if this is the beginning of the hero’s journey, the story is done. The movie is a grounded, “realistic”, look at the question of “what if a regular guy had superhuman abilities and didn’t realize it because everyone thinks that is the realm of comic books and fantasy”. Anything beyond the first movie is just another superhero movie. Also, Shyamalan has proven himself to be a flash in the pan. I think he would have ruined his own creation, just like the Wachowskis did to the Matrix, if given the opportunity.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s funny you went to the Matrix example because as I was reading through your comment about the story being done, that’s exactly what I was thinking of.

      Like

      • Thinking about this more, I can better empathize with your view about the Terminator movies. While I still feel that the Terminator universe is worth exploring with genuinely good movies, I think I’m understanding how you can feel that only one movie was necessary to tell the story.

        Like

        • From a pure story-telling perspective, most sequels are unnecessary. Hollywood makes sequels purely for financial reasons, not because there is more story to tell. In the case of the Terminator, the story had a beginning, middle and an end. There’s only so much you can do without wildly changing the premise. If you make a movie about Skynet, we’ve already seen that done. In the very first movie, we were told everything we needed to know about that story. Four sequels later, there’s just not a lot of meat left on that bone. But if you change it too much, you’re no longer making a Terminator movie.

          It’s a really difficult puzzle to sort out. I feel bad for whoever is tasked with the next reboot because I just don’t know how you can do it.

          Like

        • Good point about sequels. I think you are right that most are unnecessary, even if they turn out good in the end. Probably the biggest exceptions I can think of are planned sequels like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars, which in reality are one story told in three parts.

          Like

        • Certain characters lend themselves to having ongoing adventures. James Bond is kind of the prototype. His personal life doesn’t matter much. Just doing his job is highly cinematic. It makes sense for a character like that to appear in one adventure after another. Super heroes are also designed for perpetual storytelling. Their stories don’t have arcs. Stan Lee once said that the art of comic book writing is creating the illusion of change while maintaining the status quo. Characters who are set up like that are going to lend themselves to sequels very well.

          With Star Wars, you have this great big world where all kinds of adventures can play out. So even though Luke Skywalker’s story had a beginning, middle and an end, there’s still more story to tell in that world. That kind of approach is tricky to pull off. Do we really care to see a movie set in the world of Die Hard if John McClane isn’t the star? No. That’s why you don’t see that sort of thing. It seems like it could work for Terminator because time traveling killer robots are cool and Cameron created an interesting mythology. But the problem is that story is all tied to John Connor’s status as savior of the human race. If you do a Terminator movie that doesn’t somehow involve John or Sarah Connor, you’re not fighting the real battle. We know John Connor will defeat Skynet so if he’s not somehow involved, we know whatever we are watching doesn’t really matter.

          Like

  4. 15 years ago Unbreakable became the superhero movie we need now

    http://www.avclub.com/article/15-years-ago-unbreakable-became-superhero-movie-we-228635

    In 2000, there were few superheroes in movies. Joel Schumacher had kamikazed Batman, Bryan Singer’s X-Men was beta-testing audiences’ threshold for geekier properties, and Spider-Man’s record-breaking opening weekend was still two years away. The possibility that Norse gods, shrinking high-tech suits, and purple aliens coveting galactic jewelry would dominate our theaters would have seemed ludicrous. Now that all that has happened, what’s become unbelievable is that no film could have a greater impact on the modern escapades of the caped and cowled than one currently celebrating its 15th anniversary: M. Night Shyamalan’s Unbreakable.

    Unbreakable was something of an oddity in 2000. It was an origin story when non-comic readers were unfamiliar with them. It was a serious-minded, reality-based superhero movie when there were none. Not only that, but it was an unconventional hero narrative, in which security guard David Dunn (Bruce Willis) is led to believe that he has powers by an osteogenesis-imperfecta-suffering comic devotee, Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson). It was a small-scale origin story not about a hero needing to learn how to use new powers, but one that made a mystery—one unsolved until late in the movie—out of whether its hero even had powers at all.

    What also distinguished Unbreakable was its greater emphasis on the human parts of its superhuman story. The mystery may drive the film, but in spirit it’s closer to a character drama. David doesn’t face supervillains or world-ending threats, but things more recognizable: the deep melancholy he wears like his trusty poncho; his growing estrangement from his wife; his inability to be the father his son needs him to be. Unbreakable blends the mythological with the personal. David doesn’t just slowly discover his abilities, but himself; he seeks heroism not necessarily to provide salvation for others, but so he can have purpose again, so he can feel whole. Yes, Unbreakable is thrilling as a story about a self-professed ordinary man discovering he is extraordinary, but it’s most powerful as a story of a broken man looking to fix himself and his family—to save not the world, but his world.

    In other words, Unbreakable is about something. It’s never willing to sacrifice universal themes, relatable characters, and mature storytelling for superhero thrills. The same can’t be said about superhero movies in 2015.

    Now that the adventures of the super powered have become ubiquitous, and films are streamlined into cinematic universes and house styles, we’re increasingly seeing homogenous plots, visuals, and ambitions. We have third acts that devolve into CGI fireworks that are not only strikingly similar, but whose apocalyptic stakes are so detached from reality they feel meaningless. Then there’s the hero characters whose personality only go as far as the fabric of their capes. They may save the universe, but they never feel universal, and character development is often forfeited for character cameos. As for the plots, they feel increasingly like they’re adhering not so much to any kind of creative ambition, but instead to a corporately mandated playbook.

    The result is that surprise, awe, originality, and audience investment are slowly leaking out of superhero movies like air from a tire that’s still being driven on. These films are starting to matter only as world building and crossover exercises. What superhero movie has had anything even resembling a theme that isn’t just a villain’s evil plan masquerading as one (The Winter Soldier’s surveillance state, Age Of Ultron’s deadly artificial intelligence)? With nothing to give superhero movies real weight anymore, they’re at risk of floating away like balloons that become more and more indistinguishable the higher they go. But they still make lots of money. Marvel and DC see no incentive to change yet, and we’re facing two dozen of their films in the next five years alone. That prospect makes it hard not to see something Elijah says to David in Unbreakable as prophetic: “These are mediocre times. People are starting to lose hope.”

    With superhero movies becoming increasingly ho-hum as they answer the question “Where do we go next?” with “BIGGER,” one can’t help but despair that the better answer will never be considered: “Smaller.” That’s why Unbreakable, on the occasion of its 15th anniversary, has become not only better and more relevant, but desperately needed—not just as a welcome (retroactive) counter-programming and palate cleanser, but as a possible example of the benefits of going smaller.

    Awe? Unbreakable achieves it with a workout scene, a magical moment when David and his son decide to test how much weight he can lift. As the scene goes on, and David lifts more and more, we share the wonder of their growing realization of how strong David is, how much stronger he might be, and that he could really be a superhero. What about third act stakes? Unbreakable pulls it off in a single suburban home. There David faces off against a killer holding a family captive, in a climax full of tension because what’s at stake isn’t just the horror of a family dying in their own home, but the risk that David might fail on his first outing as a hero and never realize the destiny he’s chosen for himself.

    Some of the last moments of Unbreakable drive home how consequence and significance it achieves with very little. In the (non-twist) ending, the morning after David has saved the day, his own family is gathered in the kitchen for breakfast. David puts a newspaper article about the heroic feat in front of his son. His son looks at it and then, tears in his eyes, looks up at his father in search of confirmation that he really is the anonymous hero on the cover, the hero he believes his father was all along. David, with a gentle smile, nods. That moment is everything. More than Unbreakable finally confirming David is extraordinary, and more than Elijah’s devastating revelation yet to come, this is the whole movie. It’s a father finally bonded with his son after reconciling with his wife the night before. It’s a family peacefully reconnecting over a simple breakfast. Most of all, it’s a man who has accepted who he is supposed to be. He has completed the journey the movie has set him on, and you feel like you’ve gone somewhere important with the movie’s characters. You leave having seen something consequential and profound. You leave feeling that Unbreakable mattered.

    Does this mean for modern superhero movies to matter, Thor: Ragnarok should be a Before Midnight-like drama solely about Thor and Jane Foster’s relationship, or that Doctor Strange should be about a web developer named Stephen Strange who believes he’s going insane until someone tries to convince him his hallucinations are actually magical abilities? Of course not. We still need, and want, superhero movies to be bigger than life. There is meaning in escapist entertainment, but this brand of escapist entertainment needs to work harder at being meaningful.

    Modern superhero movies could look many places to learn how to take a step back from their playbooks or perpetual phase/team-up planning. But it’s hard to imagine a better source of inspiration than Unbreakable. A few pinches of the thematic and character driven success of M. Night Shyamalan’s movie could go a long way toward making superheroes and their fights mean something again. What’s at stake is nothing less than the future (quality) of superhero movies.

    Like

  5. Unbreakable only made 96 mill of 75 in usa however made over 200 mill worldwide. It did not flop studios where expecting sixth sense numbers especially in USa. Even taking in unbreakable domestic gross. It did decent business. I think why it did not do that good is people expected it to be spooky like sixth sense. Given Bruce and M night teaming. They did expect it to be mostly human drama. Its not M night most successful movie but it has a devoted cult following

    Like

  6. The Theory of the Unified Original Superhero Movie Universe

    https://web.archive.org/web/20140913202639/http://ohilodude.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/the-theory-of-the-unified-original-superhero-movie-universe/

    An Editorial by Avery Hinks

    As you may know, these days every Comic Book Superhero Movie released to the big screen is a part of its own greater universe. With Disney’s Marvel Cinematic Universe, Fox’s X-Men Universe, WB’s Justice League universe, and even Sony building a universe off its Spider-Man properties, every studio is scrambling to adapt Comic Book Superhero movies and make buckets of cash.

    But aside from Comic Books Superhero Movies, there are also a few original Superhero Movies, based on no previously written comic books. These original Superhero movies have not built there own universe around themselves the same way Comic Book Superhero movies have…or have they?

    What if almost every live action original Superhero movie we’ve seen since 2000 has been building a Cinematic Universe right in front of us, and we haven’t even noticed. I have investigated this theory and actually found some interesting things that could in fact link them all together into one universe, and it all starts here:

    UNBREAKABLE (2000)

    In this M. Night Shyamalan directed film, we see the story of David Dunn (played by Bruce Willis), a man who mysteriously acquired the powers of being indestructible.

    He at first struggles to deal with having these powers but eventually finds a way to use them for good. However, his fun is interrupted by one man: Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson).

    Elijah has a deformity, that makes him have very weak and easily breakable bones. He is fascinated by David’s powers and we find out in the end that all the death-defying situations David has gone through in his life have been caused by Elijah, who was just testing the limits of David’s powers. Elijah discovers that David is completely indestructible and has super strength. Elijah has become afraid of David’s abilities but luckily for him, David has come to his downfall after finding out all of these death-defying situations thus far have been Elijah’s doings.

    The origin of David Dunn’s powers are still unexplained by the end of the movie.

    Elijah is not done yet. His fight against people with powerful abilities continues in…

    JUMPER (2008)

    This movie takes place in 2008, 8 years after the events in Unbreakable.

    In this movie, there are people who exist on earth who harness the power of teleportation. They are known as Jumpers. It follows the story of David Rice (Hayden Christiansen) and Griffin (Jamie Bell), who are both Jumpers.

    These two Jumpers are running from a government organization who hunts Jumpers, lead by a character named Rolland (Samuel L. Jackson).

    How can Samuel L. Jackson play two different characters in this universe, you ask? Well that’s easy: they are the same character.

    Both Elijah and Rolland are fascinated by people with powerful abilities, want to test their limits, and ultimately eliminate them completely. My theory is that after dealing with David Dunn, within the 8 years between Unbreakable and Jumper, Elijah got surgery to fix his bones, and in this government organization goes by the code name: Rolland.

    This would also explain why Rolland so strongly reacts to David Rice’s first incident happening 8 years ago, because it reminds him of when he was weaker, and also his first investigation of a human with powerful abilities.

    We also find out at the end of this movie that these powers can be passed on through genetics, because David Rice’s mother was a Jumper as well.

    I wonder if David Dunn’s son, Joseph Dunn is indestructible like his father.

    So we now know there are two types of Super Powers that exist in this universe: Indestructibility and Teleportation.

    However, we still do not know the origin of the Super Powers in this universe. The next movie might give us some clues though…

    HANCOCK (2008)

    This movie takes place in Los Angeles, California and follows the story of the loud-mouthed superhero, Hancock (Will Smith), who starts out as an asshole but in the end realizes that fighting for the good of the people is a better thing to do.

    Hancock is indestructible and has super strength just like David Dunn did. Hancock also has the power of flight. Does this mean David Dunn could fly as well? I don’t know, and it is not important.

    What is important is that in this movie, we actually know the origin of Hancock’s powers, and it actually sets him apart from the rest of the heroes in this universe.

    Hancock is unclear about his past because a long time ago he suffered from amnesia, and forgot everything about himself. Until he meets a character named Mary (Charlize Theron), who has the exact same abilities as Hancock.

    Mary explains to Hancock that they are from another planet, and their race came to Earth many years ago (Hancock also ages VERY slowly, by the way).

    So what does this tell us? This tells us that the origin of Super Powers on Earth could have came here with the alien race that came to Earth a very long time ago.

    Also, I believe that the government focuses less on hunting down Hancock because he has proven not to be messed with many times. Most can be seen in the first half of the movie.

    So was Hancock’s alien race the origin of the Super Powers? We will find out later. But for now, some new types of powers are introduced…

    PUSH (2009)

    This movie follows the story of two teenagers, Nick Gant (Chris Evans) who has telekinetic powers, and Cassie Holmes (Dakota Fanning) who possess the power of seeing into the future. Nick Gant does not practice using his powers very much so he is not good at using them.

    They most go to Hong Kong and rescue another girl, Kira, who is a telepath, before the government gets to her first.

    There are many other types of powers presented in this movie as well, such as tracking, shape-shifting, and healing powers.

    People with telekinesis are referred to as “Movers”, people who can see the future are called “Watchers”, telepaths are called “Pushers”, shape-shifters are called “Shifters”, healers are called “Stichers”, and people who can follow scents are called “Sniffers”, people who destroy things by yelling are called “Bleeders”, and people who can stay hidden are called “Shadows”. So, in this case, it would make sense that in this universe, people who can teleport are called “Jumpers”.

    That last part is what links Push into this universe. Telekinetics and other people with powers are being hunted by a government organization just like Jumpers are.

    The only difference is that the government organization in Push is lead by a guy who actually has powers of his own.

    The government organization is called Division. Division is a group of people with powers capturing other people with powers against their will so they can be used as weapons against things like other countries, law enforcement, or maybe even aliens (if Hancock exists in this world that would make sense).

    Division could very well be the same government organization that we see in Jumper. Maybe they want to eliminate Jumpers but recruit everyone else because they feel Jumpers are too dangerous.

    This movie also states that people with powers were initially noticed in 1945 and used in the second World War. It also makes it very clear that powers can be passed on through genetics just like in Jumper.

    This movie mainly introduces us to the many other types of powers people can have in this universe.

    It does not go too deep into the origin of the heroes, but we learn A LOT more about both “Movers” and the origin of the Super Powers in the next, most recent installment in this universe…

    CHRONICLE (2012)

    This movie takes place in Seattle and follows the story of three teenage boys who go for a walk while they are at a party and find something of supernatural nature.

    They find an alien rock formation in a tunnel underground. They touch it, explore it, and much more. The next day, they wake up with telekinesis.

    At first they have fun with it, doing things like building Lego sets with their minds and tearing the limbs off of spiders. But then they seriously start to investigate their powers and unlike Nick Gant, practice using them a lot.

    They even figure out how to levitate themselves and fly!

    One of the boys, Andrew (Dane Dehaan) lets his powers get the best of him, however, after Steve (Michael B. Jordan) falls out of the sky and dies while flying.

    Andrew goes down a dark path and ends up going on a rampage, killing lots of people.

    This backs up what Elijah Price/Rolland said about people not being responsible enough to have powers. It would also explain why Hancock, the only non-human hero in this universe, is the most responsible one.

    But the main thing Chronicle adds to this cinematic universe is the origin of the Super Powers. Alien rock formations like the one in Chronicle came to earth many years ago with Hancock’s alien race and have given people all over the world powers like the ones Hancock and his race possess.

    And since the powers can also be passed on through genetics, more and more people will have powers without finding one of the rock formations.

    The main villain in this universe is the government because they are hunting the people with these abilities and trying to eliminate them.

    We can also establish from these 5 movies that there are five main kinds of Super Powers in this universe, as well as some other, less common ones:
    ◾Unbreakables (David Dunn, Hancock, Mary)
    ◾Jumpers (David Rice, Griffin)
    ◾Movers (Nick Gant, Andrew Detmer, Matt Garetty, Steve Montgomery)
    ◾Watchers (Cassie Holmes)
    ◾Pushers (Kira, Agent Henry Carver)
    ◾Shifters
    ◾Sniffers
    ◾Stichers
    ◾Bleeders
    ◾Shadows

    Chronicle is most likely not the last installment in this universe though. This October 2014, we will see the release of Birdman, starring Michael Keaton. It could prove to be part of this universe as well.

    There is also a film currently in development called Brilliance, which also involves people with Superpowers being hunted by the government.

    And of course, sequels to Hancock, Jumper, and Chronicle have been in development for some time now so we could see those added to the universe as well. Or maybe even a crossover film!

    Well, there you have it folks! The Original Superhero Movie Universe has been explained! Go watch all these movies for yourself and see if you can spot some connections of your own, and leave them in the comments section below!

    I will make more updates if I notice new connections as well.

    Like

  7. Well.. this post is no longer valid… How exciting!!!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: