>"I personally feel like the amount of content that comes out of Hollywood that is garbage - they don't care enough to actually make it great for you guys."
Is he supposed to be wrong? Because he's not.
An actor can only do so much for a movie and the first film did well enough. He could also have issues with a movie if stuff was changed after filming was done.
>guy paying the bills taking any gig he can get >versus a guy with a differing opinion on scientific consensus
Horrible analogy. 1/10. Gave you a point for not making a food analogy.
Shazam 2 was at least carried by charismatic acting and likable characters, which makes it better than >Man of Steel >Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice >Suicide Squad >Josstice League >Wonder Woman 1984 >Black Adam
which places it in the upper half of DCEU films ever made
He's still doing better than the rest of the cast of Chuck. But I can understand his frustration. He had his foot in the door with Thor The Dark World as the new Fandral actor, led to believe the role was bigger than what it really was, then the Warriors Three just die in Ragnarok without Thor even caring. Then he gets his own starring role in Shazam, it does well and is well received, only to get a shit sequel thanks to Dwayne Johnson muscling in while the cinematic universe both are in crumbles
>"I personally feel like the amount of content that comes out of Hollywood that is garbage - they don't care enough to actually make it great for you guys."
Is he supposed to be wrong? Because he's not.
I mean, Shazam 2 was fricking horrible so yeah, he's undercutting his own point.
I didn't know Zach wrote and directed Shazam 2
>"We have to actively not choose the garbage"
>Chooses the garbage.
maybe he's telling everyone he's glad nobody saw shazam 2
An actor can only do so much for a movie and the first film did well enough. He could also have issues with a movie if stuff was changed after filming was done.
>”We have to actively not choose the garbage”
>says the dude from fricking Chuck
lets just disregard what he says because of who he is
wouldn't you disregard what a flat earther said about astronomy?
>guy paying the bills taking any gig he can get
>versus a guy with a differing opinion on scientific consensus
Horrible analogy. 1/10. Gave you a point for not making a food analogy.
first season was good
he's malding but also he's right.
sometimes all it takes for you to realize how stuff really is is getting the rug pulled from under you
>if the movie stinks, just don't go
He's right. They don't care.
He ain’t wrong though
Shazam 2 was at least carried by charismatic acting and likable characters, which makes it better than
>Man of Steel
>Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice
>Suicide Squad
>Josstice League
>Wonder Woman 1984
>Black Adam
which places it in the upper half of DCEU films ever made
he's right, he just doesn't realize Shazam 2 is the garbage
And here's me, never planning to watch Barbie, and it has already made over a billion. Humanity has shit taste.
it's not a bad movie tbh
a bit heavy-handed with its messaging and kind of lets the style get in the way of the plot/characters but it's fun
He's still doing better than the rest of the cast of Chuck. But I can understand his frustration. He had his foot in the door with Thor The Dark World as the new Fandral actor, led to believe the role was bigger than what it really was, then the Warriors Three just die in Ragnarok without Thor even caring. Then he gets his own starring role in Shazam, it does well and is well received, only to get a shit sequel thanks to Dwayne Johnson muscling in while the cinematic universe both are in crumbles