The END of the DC movie franchaises may be upon us...

[Kane]

Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.

If SR does indeed prove unprofitable, there will likely be no sequels (given the massive budget it requires).

This may likely also convince WB to NOT continue the DC superhero movies and NOT to take chances on the lesser known heroes when Superman proved to be unpopular.

Flash, Wonder Woman, Shazam, Green Lantern etc...Big budget DC Superhero films like these likely wont happen if Superman proves unprofitable.

Even though Batman Begins will be the only ones to continue, its unlikely we'll see other DC Superheroes step up into these big budget films if Superman is a failure.......

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future.

Discuss.

[GL's Light]

Batman will continue as a franchise, that's for certain. And Warners will probably have another crack at Superman with a shorter, lighter, more action-packed sequel - that's as long as the worldwide gross is boosted by a good international run. If the film underperforms overseas, too, then they might fold up the Superman franchise for a while and start from scratch down the road.

SR's box office could, unfortunately, give Warners cold feet about greenlighting other superhero projects. Greenlights for Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Lantern, Shazam, and maybe even Watchmen just got a lot sketchier.

While I'm dying to see more DC superheroes make it onto the silver screen, from a hard-headed business point of view I actually think Warners might be better off waiting for a few years before launching most of their superhero films. Let the current Marvel-led cycle wind down, and then launch a new wave of DC-led superhero films in four or five years. In the meantime Warners should take advantage of the many great non-superhero properties that DC has. Let's see film versions of Sgt. Rock, The Warlord, The Sandman, The Unknown Soldier, etc.

And when Warners does launch any new DC superhero films they need to conceptualize them so that they're both great high quality films and films that work on a popcorn munching entertainment level. It's also important, for superhero films and for Hollywood's economic health in general, that the studios figure out a way to deliver great production values at a better price. They're asking for trouble with the hyper-inflation they've allowed to set in to their production budgets.

[Kane]

Theres also the fact that BB actually did worse than SR during its first 3 days, while silly movies like Fantastic 4 make huge revenues.

I hope this wont make WB dumb the franchaises down again...

It pisses me off that quality mature films like SR and BB do so poorly compared to that crap.

[GL's Light]

Well, Batman Begins got off to a slower start than Fantastic Four but ended up grossing more.

I also hope that Warners doesn't go anywhere near the campy route again. But they need to design their films to have both quality and the entertainment values that put butts in seats.

I take the long view with the superhero genre. In proper perpective, it's a genre in its infancy. My hope is that we'll get great new versions of all of these characters - DC and Marvel - over the decades to come, with filmmakers stepping up to the plate who really understand how to make superhero films that are both artistically rewarding and full of good old-fashioned entertainment value.

[Kane]

Sadly that likely wont be a reality if Superman fails in WB's eyes.

I really dont know what to say anymore..

[Lex Luthor]

It's true that SR isnt doing as great as WB execs would have hoped, but it's still early and word of mouth might get around like it did with BB and everything may turn out ok. If not, I think WB will still take a few more chances on DC franchises even if SR turns out to be something of a failure at the box office. I mean, I would hope that WB could see the potential of other DC franchises, and consider them for future films.

[Steelsheen]

cant you guys wait till the holiday weekend is over before ringing the death knell? its only Sunday morning for goodness sake. the partying has just begun :D

[Antonello Blueberry]

cant you guys wait till the holiday weekend is over before ringing the death knell? its only Sunday morning for goodness sake. the partying has just begun :D
Really, I think you'll have to see how the movie performs worldwide before declaring it a success or a failure. And anyway, they still have target release dates for the Batman and Superman sequels.

[The Geek Vault]

I guarentee you SR will get more money during this weekend. Since its the fourth of July soon. I would love to see a Green Lantern movie and a Flash movie in the future.

[dpm07]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

[Mysterio]

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future. Discuss.

Sadly that likely wont be a reality if Superman fails in WB's eyes.

I really dont know what to say anymore..i'd say...quit being melodramatic over whether some comic book movies get made or not. on the list of important things in life, comic book movies, while a lot of fun, rank some where below, oh....clipping your toenails.

i'm not going to see Superman Returns. Boooorrrring. it is a rehash and he's not an exciting character.

[Lex Luthor]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

Well said. :up:

[dnno1]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

I was very surprised to hear my brother and his wife disappointed when the saw the film last night (they were expecting more and saw some inconsistencies). I am still going to take my family to see it this afternoon though, because I am a Superman fan and I think my kids will like it.

Next time use spoilers in your post so that you won't dissapoint the folks who haven't seen the film (especially the ones overseas).

[JackBauer]

the movie has yet to premiere in a lot of countries (mostly because of the World Cup). not to mention DVD revenues. it may not be the smash hit WB wanted but it'll make profit, and nowadays that's the only thing a studio needs to warrant a sequel.

[cerealkiller182]

one bad movie will nor bring down the future of DC movies especially considering Joss Whedon, David GOyer, and chris Nolan are working pretty hard on their movies.

[chiefchirpa]

SR will reap big money.

As to why it won't get Spider-Man's money is because Spidey is more brightly colored than Superman and ergo, that's a good call for kids. In the sequel, Superman has to have its BRIGHT BLUE AND RED BACK. Less drama, more action.

Batman has gloomier tone. Bummer. Well compensate it with action and gadgetries. Too realistic - not so profitable. Put in more gadgets and surprises, Batman 2 is cruising on the money lane.

Oh, the next box office explosion is Spiderman 3. Mark my word. Even though Raimi doesn't like Venom as a character, Venom is there to bring in the fanboys and money.

[thedarks0ldier]

i'd say...quit being melodramatic over whether some comic book movies get made or not. on the list of important things in life, comic book movies, while a lot of fun, rank some where below, oh....clipping your toenails.

i'm not going to see Superman Returns. Boooorrrring. it is a rehash and he's not an exciting character.
They dont make trolls like they use to

[Denny67]

I think the problem with the comic movie franchises is that the pendulum swing too far in one direction or the other. You either have a bunch action with a crappy story or you have tons of character development and too little on the action.

Comic adaptations like any other film need a balance of both. Then factor in egotistical film makers and know nothing studio executives who always have to stray away from the source material and bring their own “vision” or should we say revision and or marketing plants to the party.

Result... they change who and what they think classic characters should be like on film. When that is done you will always have a big bag of mixed emotions from your movie goers. Is that really the goal here?

Call me nuts but I always thought that when the audience was made happy by a good movie experience the in turn spend money?

So far Spider-Man has been the best about staying true(ish) to the comics. In return it has been rewarded with massive profits.

Let hope that does not change and DC/WB gets a clue. I mean really. All they have to do is get the guys who write the animated stuff to help on a script and they are set.

[Kane]

one bad movie will nor bring down the future of DC movies especially considering Joss Whedon, David GOyer, and chris Nolan are working pretty hard on their movies.

Nolan will continue with Batman.

But I doubt WB would take chances on lesser heroes if Superman doesnt sell.

And about Goyer and Whedon, it wouldnt be the first time WB threw out scripts in production.

Look at how many scripts were scrapped for Superman over the past decade and longer.

[Addendum]

I might see Superman Returns, though it all depends on my ankle. I don't feel like driving a car with a third degree ankle sprain, lacking the ability to put any weight on it, and trying to navigate through a damned multiplex with crutches.

If it doesn't heal in time, I can wait for the DVD.

As for the scripts, they were scrapped because they weren't that good.

[Aethea]

I do not think Superman is a failure, but part of its lack of profitable intake is due to the extreme deviation from the comics--including the neck tight outfit, which is disuading a lot of people from going. It is a good story, but a great risk Bryan Singer's ego pushed him to undertake. I loved the movie, but hated the deviation from DC comics. I was also expecting a lot more than just a rehashed Donner Plot; you cannot deny the fact that Lex Luthor's maniacal plans in the movie are a mere echo of the plans in the first Donner film. I wanted a reintroduction of the Man of Steel! I wanted more power--in the magnitude of Darkseid invading earth--I dont know something greater than an improved version of the plot we saw in the Donner Film. Bryan did not take a look at the modern comics and this was his mistake. I mean Superman has really evolved and fans were expecting this evolution to translate into the movie. Sadly Singer's tunnel vision and passion for Donner's films just narrowed his focus extremely allowing the new movie to become nothing but a mere METAMOVIE (a movie about an existing movie).

[NotFadeAway]

Blame Singer!

[ShadowBoxing]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.I have to disagree. People don't know enough about Superman to understand that he has any other villians besides crashing planes, Luthor and natural disasters. The most they have seen at this point is General Zod and a few a Bizzaro rip off.

Also I hate to break it to the comic fans. But people outside of this community which is geekdom don't watch JLU, so the fact that Dini/Timm do something different doesn't make for a success model either. They hooked a lot of youngsters yes, but their shows are not racking in the kind of money we are talking about in regards to a movie.

People watch these movies based on "climates". Take X3 for example, which set off the summer with a bang. Both it and Da Vinci Code were panned by critics and movie goers alike. Much similar to the reception of Fantastic Four the previous year. Singer and his staff could have made a Superman that made Batman Begins look like Batman and Robin and audience's still wouldn've have come to see it after feeling like X3 was a waste of their money.

Nobody outside these fan boards knows anything about movies they are going to see other than what a title and preview tells them. X3 is a textbook case where an effective advertising campaign got people to see a movie that apparently no one wanted to see a second time. Superman Returns was no able to capitalize on the public however and therefore did not make the money it expected. It has nothing to do with the story, director, writer, villian or otherwise. If that were the case movies like X-Men would make no money since almost no one is familiar with the franchise.

[Addendum]

Hell, even as a member of these boards, I see a movie when the trailer hooks me or if I'm interested in it.

The latter part takes a while though, but then there's DVD

[ShadowBoxing]

Hell, even as a member of these boards, I see a movie when the trailer hooks me or if I'm interested in it.

The latter part takes a while though, but then there's DVDExactly. You could advertise the heck out of the worst movie of all time *cough*Titanic*cough* and make a *****load of money just because you hook everyone in for that first weekend...if you're lucky, longer.

[Addendum]

That's why I'm glad I don't go along with everyone else.

[cerealkiller182]

Nolan will continue with Batman.

But I doubt WB would take chances on lesser heroes if Superman doesnt sell.

And about Goyer and Whedon, it wouldnt be the first time WB threw out scripts in production.

Look at how many scripts were scrapped for Superman over the past decade and longer.

True about the scripts, but Goyer and Whedon and Nolan all seem like the passionate type. They are willing to stay close to the characters and mythos and hold back their own vision (most of which syncs up pretty nicely with the character anyway).

Plus i think DC should take the chance on lesser heroes. Characters like Question and Jonah Hex and other non-convential superhero properties could do very well in the market. I feel that is why Blade did so well (better than expected anyway).

[ShadowBoxing]

They'll make the movies if they think they have a solid script to sell. If Batman and Robin couldn't end the Batman franchise for good (let alone the superhero franchise), then a quality albeit a bit lacking film like Superman won't end these other films.

[Kane]

True about the scripts, but Goyer and Whedon and Nolan all seem like the passionate type. They are willing to stay close to the characters and mythos and hold back their own vision (most of which syncs up pretty nicely with the character anyway).

Whedon is removing the star spangled panties and making up his own villian. I think he may be doing a Smallville-like updated take on WW. His script was already rejected by WB once and send back for revisions.


Plus i think DC should take the chance on lesser heroes. Characters like Question and Jonah Hex and other non-convential superhero properties could do very well in the market. I feel that is why Blade did so well (better than expected anyway).

I wish WB would, but realistically.... I dont see it happening. All they care about is their precious money.

[dave_peeps]

I think Flash and Wonder Woman will get greenlit eventually regardless of how SR does at the box office. Green Lantern is another story. G.L. would require a large budget to be done right. Lot special effects. I dont think we will see the Emerald Knight onscreen anytime soon. SR looked great.......the story was horrible.

[IAmHe9]

Dude, don't worry about it. Superman Returns made 32 million in its first three days, plus 52 million as of now. That's about 84 million. By the end of July 4th, the film will probably be into the 100s. Didn't the film cost 185 million to make? If the movie does gross 100 million by July 4th, that'll already be more than halfway to a profit. Consider the good reviews it's getting, and the fact that it'll probably do well in the DVD market, and I'm sure that when all is said and done, a month or two after the DVD is released (sometime in September) that the film will have made a profit. I hope.

[BrianWilly]

Wow, don't you all think you're overreacting a bit? "The end of the DC movie franchises?" Way to be overdramatic.

Superman isn't a financial disappointment at all; it's performing quite solidly. It already beat Batman's first weekend numbers. It didn't beat Spider-Man 2, but considering that Spider-Man 2 set the bar impossibly high, that's hardly saying much. Was it estimated to perform better? Perhaps. But it's not as if the movie's flopped or performing abysmally or something, geez.

[Ben Breeck]

Whedon is removing the star spangled panties and making up his own villian. I think he may be doing a Smallville-like updated take on WW. His script was already rejected by WB once and send back for revisions.


If the star spangled panties go, they had better not be replaced with something that makes her look like Xena.

And as for her villains, she has everything from Greek monsters and gods, to unscrupulous corporate executives, to a lady who combines the looks and backstory of Sheena Queen of the Jungle with the worst personality traits of Idi Amin Dada and Mobutu Sese Seko, to Neo-Nazis. If Joss can't find a character worth a butt-kicking among them, he's nowhere near as smart as I thought he was.

I mean, it's not as if Joss is working with Pantha, Vixen, or Drumroll.

[Kane]

Wow, don't you all think you're overreacting a bit? "The end of the DC movie franchises?" Way to be overdramatic.

Superman isn't a financial disappointment at all; it's performing quite solidly. It already beat Batman's first weekend numbers. It didn't beat Spider-Man 2, but considering that Spider-Man 2 set the bar impossibly high, that's hardly saying much. Was it estimated to perform better? Perhaps. But it's not as if the movie's flopped or performing abysmally or something, geez.

No trust me.

Its in the realm of possibilities and I never said it would be definative that SR would bomb. Im just thinking about the possibility of it.

Like Perry White said............"Always be prepared"

Superman is Dead. Superman Lives.

[Kane]

Personally I want it to soar high. I loved the film.... but sadly today's audience prefers cartoony crap like Fantastic Four than mature films with dignity.

[IAmHe9]

Superman is far outperforming F4.

[zer00]

Superman Returns a finnancial disaster? Hardly, it's still performing solid. The date change might have hurt it more than helped actually. How many times I got people confused seeing things that said 30th then 28th. It's already picked up.

It's not the movies. It the regular audiences these days. Put it to you like this, King Kong does poorly at the BO(it didn't bomb, just poorly) Date Movie makes a **** load of money while everyone was dumping on it. What does that tell you? Regardless of SR being the best comic film I have ever personally seen. I'm sorry if it didn't make a billion dollars in 2 days. But in this day and age you can't tell. Regardless of getting excellent reviews or being hyped. It's the audiences that will probably wait for the DVD.

I write that while praying Whedon's WW movie never makes it off the ground fyi

[Kane]

Ya I prefer quality over box office gross....and the film was quality

But it all depends how WB sees it I guess.

[Denny67]

Dude, don't worry about it. Superman Returns made 32 million in its first three days, plus 52 million as of now. That's about 84 million. By the end of July 4th, the film will probably be into the 100s. Didn't the film cost 185 million to make? If the movie does gross 100 million by July 4th, that'll already be more than halfway to a profit. Consider the good reviews it's getting, and the fact that it'll probably do well in the DVD market, and I'm sure that when all is said and done, a month or two after the DVD is released (sometime in September) that the film will have made a profit. I hope.

I was bale to find this oneline:


According to The Numbers.com, Bryan Singer was quoted as saying the budget for Superman Returns was $250 million in late 2004. He has since denied that figure.Pamela McClintock writes in Variety, Warner Bros. has unofficially put the budget at $184 million, "factoring in tax breaks offered in Australia." She further points out that without the Australian tax break of 12%, the budget would be "easily north of $200 million".


Just so everyone is on the same page. :)

[thedarks0ldier]

Maybe DC should realese movies sooner. like around May

[LostSon88]

bump

[CConn]

I was bale to find this oneline:



Just so everyone is on the same page. :)That makes me feel a little bit better. I'm still confident SR will reach my predicted box office of $250 million, and with a budget of $184 mil, that should be plenty to warrent a sequel.

Happy smiley for CConn! :)

[boywonder13]

THe sequel to Batman Begins has the poetnetial to really do better than Spider-Man 2 business.......

We also have Whendon's Wonder Woman and other DC proejcts due out in '08, 09 or 10 or after this decade. DC has so many more chartacters to make movies out of and they wont stop if one does bad.

[Kane]

They would if Superman fails, hes the biggest...next to Bats.

I dont think WW will do that great either. Female superhero films have proven to sell well.

[CConn]

Female superhero films have also been utter crap.

In any case, yeah they would if Superman failed. But while it's opening has been rather mediocre, it hasn't. Not yet, at least.

[BrianWilly]

Considering that SR is "the largest five-day opening in Warner history," I highly doubt that they're disappointed. In fact, they outright said that they weren't (http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2006-07-02-box-office-analysis_x.htm?csp=34).
"Any time you can break $100 million in your first week, you're in an elite club," says Dan Fellman, distribution chief for Warner Bros. "People can get carried away with expectations. We're blown away."
Mediocre? Hardly.

[Lestat74]

In response to Aethea's post....

I really don't think any deviation from the comics can be a factor in whether a comic book based film is a hit or not, especially when you are talking about really, really minor things like how his costume neckline is in comparison. The only people who care about that kind of stuff is Geekdom....I'm sorry to break it to you. Those several hundred thousand of us are NOTHING in comparison to the millions of average citizens who only know these characters from movies and TV. What does the average person know about Superman? They know the movies...they know Smallville, they know Lois & Clark. I mean, I haven't heard one single person outside of internet geekdom say they aren't seeing the movie because they didn't like the costume neckline. I mean...c'mon now. And Darkseid? Yeah, I love him....but NO ONE outside of geekdom knows who the F**K he is.

And about the movie Deviating from the DC Comics? Sure it does. But every single Superman adaptation has deviated somewhat...it's the nature of the beast. Also, when It comes to comic adaptations, the Tail ALWAYS wags the dog; The comics always pick up what the media adaptations change to the Mythos. When Superman: The Movie came out and hit big, not too many years later DC re-worked Superman to make him more like the movie cuz that's now what everyone knew as Superman ( For example: Krypton became a barren crytaline world, Clark was not Superboy in Smallville, etc. Even the Fan favorite "CEO Of LexCorp" Lex Luthor came about because Marv Wolfman and John Byrne, the guys who re-vamped Superman, liked the Gene Hackman Lex and wondered where a genius like him originally got all that money from. Even know, the changes brought about by Smallville in the Lex/Superman relationship are being reflected by the comics continuity. Like I said...the Tail Wags the Dog. So those of you who have seen Superman Returns should not be at all surprised if she makes a special announcment to Clark very, Very soon. ;)

Now as for Wonder Woman, if Superman really does tank...then all bets are off. I could see Warners cancelling it outright frankly, which really would piss me off as I'm a huge Wonder Woman fan and a Huge Joss Whedon fan. Still, Warner HAS to not have nearly the same expectations for Wonder Woman. She's female character, and they have had notoriously bad luck in this genre. They probably hope it does as well as the first Charlie's Angels and Tomb Raider flicks, which each made around $130 Million or so. So it will have a FAR smaller budget than Batman and Superman, so it will be less of a risk.

If Superman Returns makes at least $200 Million, I think the other DC films will be safe, although they will have reduced budgets. But's it's not the money you spend, it's whatchya do with it. So what are you all waiting for?? Go see Superman again, and tell your friends to do the same...Dammit, I wanna see Wondy and Flash and The Watchmen and Green Lantern! ( Just NO Jack Black please! ) So anyways, that's my opinion.

[dpm07]

Considering that SR is "the largest five-day opening in Warner history," I highly doubt that they're disappointed. In fact, they outright said that they weren't (http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2006-07-02-box-office-analysis_x.htm?csp=34).

Mediocre? Hardly.

You do realize they aren't going to come out and say that they're disappointed? This is WB after all. They'll put whatever positive spin control can can.

The movie didn't do well over a 5-Day haul.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/5day.htm (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/5day.htm)

Now with POTC 2 coming out this next week, it is likely to drop even further. This movie was a gamble the way Singer did it, and it's a gamble that's really shown Singer's arrogance and ego, as well as failure to look at other sources than the Donner film.

[Lestat74]

"You do realize they aren't going to come out and say that they're disappointed? This is WB after all. They'll put whatever positive spin control can can."

I'm sure they were more than a bit dissapointed with Batman Begins opening weekend last year as well, no matter what they said. But they knew they had a quality film on their hands, so they stood behind it...and everything turned out all right. Hopefully it will be the same with Superman.

[BrianWilly]

You do realize they aren't going to come out and say that they're disappointed? This is WB after all. They'll put whatever positive spin control can can.

The movie didn't do well over a 5-Day haul.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/5day.htm (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/5day.htm)

Now with POTC 2 coming out this next week, it is likely to drop even further. This movie was a gamble the way Singer did it, and it's a gamble that's really shown Singer's arrogance and ego, as well as failure to look at other sources than the Donner film.
Gee, you couldn't possibly be biased against the movie or anything, could you:)?

The movie performed well and is still making a lot of money. It's amongst the best releases that the company has ever had, and it's only the first weekend. Could it have done better? Of course. But to call it a failure is just ridiculous. Look at all the movies that it has outperformed. Batman Begins? Every single Pixar movie other than Finding Nemo? Frikkin' Lord of the Rings?? Were those all failures too?

[CConn]

I never thought I'd say this while remaining heterosexual, but...I love Willy. :(

[BrianWilly]

Everyone inevitably doeshttp://smilies.vidahost.com/cwm/cwm/rcain.gif.

[Lestat74]

Nice, objective article on Superman Returns Box Office take from BoxOfficemojo.com

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2106&p=.htm

One thing they say that's very true ( which I stated in my earlier post ) is that unlike Spider-Man, Superman Returns and Batman Begins were about Rebuilding fallen franchises, not starting new ones. Also, the expectations on Superman were very inflated by the price tag, which had $40 million leftover from aborted Superman projects.

Considering that Superman IV made only 16 million ( even in 1987, that was abysmally low for a Blockbuster Movie ) we have come a loooooonnngggg way since then, dontchya think?

[Kane]

Unlike Spider-Man, F4 and other big money successes......Batman and Superman werent bright kid-friendly films..

They were darker, epic and more realistic. They are the perfect tone I want to see WB making movies in....

Only problem is that doesnt sell as well.

Regardless Singer's idea to ground SR on the classic films was still a wise move. They could have fared far worse if general audiences didnt at least have that (the memories of the older films) to spark an interest in this. Superman has been out of the spotlight for some years.

If you think they should have continued Smallville into a feature film, that wouldnt have worked right either;

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/641/supermanfuture018ve.jpg

[That-Guy]

The odd thing about all of this is that Superman Returns has grossed $84 million in five days and people are calling it a potential failure... and what's even stranger is that they could be right. When people were calling Batman Begins a flop after a fairly similar opening weekend, they were just being ridiculous because BB's budget was around $150 million. That's a lot of money, but with a $70-80 million opening weekend, there really was no cause to worry about recouping the money. But Superman Returns had a MUCH larger budget; somewhere reportedly between $260 and $300 million, according to boxofficemojo. If that's true... then making that money back will be quite a feat, especially considering POTC2 hits theaters on Friday and we all KNOW that is going to be a huge hit.

What I'm curious about is what exactly drove the cost up so much for SR. I mean, I'm not saying that it was lacking in effects or quality... I just can't help but think that an equally effective film could have been made on a much smaller budget and I wonder if Singer and WB just got a little overconfident in their ideas here. It certainly wasn't the actor's salaries that drove the price of the film up... the only star I could see demanding a fairly hefty paycheck would have been Spacey, and since he and Singer are friends and he has also showed a lasting interest in playing the character of Luthor, I don't think he was demanding an insane amount of dough. Routh certainly wasn't high priced, and I doubt Bosworth, Marsden, Langella, etc. were either, so the money obviously went to production costs.

Whenever a movie has an immense budget like this, I always ponder what exaclty cost so much. I remember when Waterworld came out it was the most expensive film ever made and I couldn't figure out why. The sets just looked like a bunch of crap that was flown in from a scrapyard in New Jersey and dropped in the water. I guess, all things considered, it would be expensive to put all of that junk together, but $200 million expensive (in 1995, when gas was still a buck a gallon)? Strange.

[Prognosticator]

Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.

If SR does indeed prove unprofitable, there will likely be no sequels (given the massive budget it requires).

This may likely also convince WB to NOT continue the DC superhero movies and NOT to take chances on the lesser known heroes when Superman proved to be unpopular.

Flash, Wonder Woman, Shazam, Green Lantern etc...Big budget DC Superhero films like these likely wont happen if Superman proves unprofitable.

Even though Batman Begins will be the only ones to continue, its unlikely we'll see other DC Superheroes step up into these big budget films if Superman is a failure.......

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future.

Discuss.

It's really a shame b/c dumbass Singer didn't even scratch the icing on the cake of what could be the most impressive franchise ever! ...Braniac, Darkseid, too bad... and what a limp way to squeeze in a "death of superman" bit in the movie

[Prognosticator]

The odd thing about all of this is that Superman Returns has grossed $84 million in five days and people are calling it a potential failure... and what's even stranger is that they could be right. When people were calling Batman Begins a flop after a fairly similar opening weekend, they were just being ridiculous because BB's budget was around $150 million. That's a lot of money, but with a $70-80 million opening weekend, there really was no cause to worry about recouping the money. But Superman Returns had a MUCH larger budget; somewhere reportedly between $260 and $300 million, according to boxofficemojo. If that's true... then making that money back will be quite a feat, especially considering POTC2 hits theaters on Friday and we all KNOW that is going to be a huge hit.

What I'm curious about is what exactly drove the cost up so much for SR. I mean, I'm not saying that it was lacking in effects or quality... I just can't help but think that an equally effective film could have been made on a much smaller budget and I wonder if Singer and WB just got a little overconfident in their ideas here. It certainly wasn't the actor's salaries that drove the price of the film up... the only star I could see demanding a fairly hefty paycheck would have been Spacey, and since he and Singer are friends and he has also showed a lasting interest in playing the character of Luthor, I don't think he was demanding an insane amount of dough. Routh certainly wasn't high priced, and I doubt Bosworth, Marsden, Langella, etc. were either, so the money obviously went to production costs.

Whenever a movie has an immense budget like this, I always ponder what exaclty cost so much. I remember when Waterworld came out it was the most expensive film ever made and I couldn't figure out why. The sets just looked like a bunch of crap that was flown in from a scrapyard in New Jersey and dropped in the water. I guess, all things considered, it would be expensive to put all of that junk together, but $200 million expensive (in 1995, when gas was still a buck a gallon)? Strange.

I'm interning at a production company and studio time to create those effects are the bulk of the flaming budget!! Plus, they've introduced new CGI tech with this movie. Studio time alone in post-production definitely drove up the $-tag.

[hippie_hunter]

True about the scripts, but Goyer and Whedon and Nolan all seem like the passionate type. They are willing to stay close to the characters and mythos and hold back their own vision (most of which syncs up pretty nicely with the character anyway).

Plus i think DC should take the chance on lesser heroes. Characters like Question and Jonah Hex and other non-convential superhero properties could do very well in the market. I feel that is why Blade did so well (better than expected anyway).

No, Warner Bros should not go down the Marvel route by making movies with lesser known characters. They should just focus on the big six.

[Warhammer]

DC movies so far, with the exception of Catwoman, have been quality films, unlike Marvel films. I want more DC movies. I hope there is no end. Pirates is opening up next week, but the only thing that could take Superman out of the #2 spot might be Miami Vice, which comes out on the 28th. I hope Superman does well.

[Warhammer]

No, Warner Bros should not go down the Marvel route by making movies with lesser known characters. They should just focus on the big six.

I agree.
I don't want an Atom Man movie or anything like that.
Waste of time and money.

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Warner underestimated the fact that millions of people are not interested in seeing a clone of a movie with a clone of our favourite Superman (no disrespect to Brandon because he's a great guy but that's why he was chosen and he himself is the first one to admit it) in a horrible suit with a less than stellar cast (with the exception of Spacey) and with a plot that involves him having a kid and dealing with natural disasters and real estate schmes while painting him to be God-like (which is why superman comic book sales were down in the late eighties and filled with mediocre writing.)
Spider-Man is so popular because ppl can relate to him and like him or not a vast majority of the worldwide public wanted to see Tom Welling end his run on Smallville (fact: SV brings in profits to Warner what SR cost to make - over 200 million dollars in tv, dvd and merchandise sales and is the most sold and watched Warner Bros. tv show worldwide) and gratuate to the big screen because they CAN relate to his portrayal of the character. He made people believe again in Superman (and again whether some ppl want to admit it or not, it's thanks to the show and his portrayal that Warner greenlit a new Superman movie) and that's why alot of ppl wanted to see Supes soar once again.
This movie as good as it is, it's still a huge disapointment to ppl who wanted something new and original. And hopefully after this great homage to the Donner film, in a few years Warner will give us a new movie with something new and with a Superman ppl can relate to.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/TomWellingsuperman12.jpg

[Superman4ever]

Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.

If SR does indeed prove unprofitable, there will likely be no sequels (given the massive budget it requires).

This may likely also convince WB to NOT continue the DC superhero movies and NOT to take chances on the lesser known heroes when Superman proved to be unpopular.

Flash, Wonder Woman, Shazam, Green Lantern etc...Big budget DC Superhero films like these likely wont happen if Superman proves unprofitable.

Even though Batman Begins will be the only ones to continue, its unlikely we'll see other DC Superheroes step up into these big budget films if Superman is a failure.......

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future.

Discuss.

It's only been five days, and you're (not just you Kane) over reacting. Also allow the movie to open worldwide first...I personally think SR will have legs, remember Titanic didn't open huge either!

$28,638,131 actually and went on to make 600 M in the US alone. Will SR have that kind of run? Nothing is impossible, but here's hoping.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=12&p=.htm

There will be other DC franchises this is NOT the end! :)

[thedarks0ldier]

The superman budget was not over 200 million

[GL's Light]

Yes, there's been a lot of overhype about SR's budget, but inflated budgets are a problem for the superhero genre (and for a lot of other genres, too. But that's another story). Superhero films are a strong box office draw, but the box office upside isn't unlimited, especially for the B-list characters. Spending $ 80-100 million on a Catwoman film is lunacy. As is spending $ 100 million on Ghost Rider.

The studios need to develop great superhero scripts that can be realized on more reasonable budgets. A Catwoman film doesn't need a bunch of CGI shots (which turned out to look crap anyway), just as Daredevil didn't need budget-inflating CGI shots either. Just put together a great story, hire the right actress and some good stunt doubles, and you should be able to deliver a knockout Catwoman film for $ 40-50 million. The same is true for a lot of other superhero characters. Just use good old-fashioned ground-level filming techniques along with a great script. Lower budgets, more profits, more sequels.

[JackBauer]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/TomWellingsuperman12.jpg

no. just... no. :down

[NotFadeAway]

Warner underestimated the fact that millions of people are not interested in seeing a clone of a movie with a clone of our favourite Superman (no disrespect to Brandon because he's a great guy but that's why he was chosen and he himself is the first one to admit it) in a horrible suit with a less than stellar cast (with the exception of Spacey) and with a plot that involves him having a kid and dealing with natural disasters and real estate schmes while painting him to be God-like (which is why superman comic book sales were down in the late eighties and filled with mediocre writing.)
Spider-Man is so popular because ppl can relate to him and like him or not a vast majority of the worldwide public wanted to see Tom Welling end his run on Smallville (fact: SV brings in profits to Warner what SR cost to make - over 200 million dollars in tv, dvd and merchandise sales and is the most sold and watched Warner Bros. tv show worldwide) and gratuate to the big screen because they CAN relate to his portrayal of the character. He made people believe again in Superman (and again whether some ppl want to admit it or not, it's thanks to the show and his portrayal that Warner greenlit a new Superman movie) and that's why alot of ppl wanted to see Supes soar once again.
This movie as good as it is, it's still a huge disapointment to ppl who wanted something new and original. And hopefully after this great homage to the Donner film, in a few years Warner will give us a new movie with something new and with a Superman ppl can relate to.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/theartist29/TomWellingsuperman12.jpg

You make alot of good points :up:

[Warhammer]

It's only been five days, and you're (not just you Kane) over reacting. Also allow the movie to open worldwide first...I personally think SR will have legs, remember Titanic didn't open huge either!

$28,638,131 actually and went on to make 600 M in the US alone. Will SR have that kind of run? Nothing is impossible, but here's hoping.

There will be other DC franchises this is NOT the end! :)

Great point. :up:

[thedarks0ldier]

It's only been five days, and you're (not just you Kane) over reacting. Also allow the movie to open worldwide first...I personally think SR will have legs, remember Titanic didn't open huge either!

$28,638,131 actually and went on to make 600 M in the US alone. Will SR have that kind of run? Nothing is impossible, but here's hoping.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=12&p=.htm

There will be other DC franchises this is NOT the end! :)$ 600 million and they didnt even make a sequal:eek:

[Katsuro]

$ 600 million and they didnt even make a sequal:eek:

Haven't you heard, they're making one!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-yn_Fnve-Q

[Lex Luthor]

Haven't you heard, they're making one!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-yn_Fnve-Q

Ugh!

I already consider Ghostbusters 2 as a vague sequel to Titanic. You know ... since the titanic arrives in New York and all.

[Antonello Blueberry]

No, Warner Bros should not go down the Marvel route by making movies with lesser known characters. They should just focus on the big six.
And not having good movies like "V for Vendetta", "Road to perdition" and "A history of violence" be made?

[Kane]

Spider-Man is so popular because ppl can relate to him and like him or not a vast majority of the worldwide public wanted to see Tom Welling end his run on Smallville (fact: SV brings in profits to Warner what SR cost to make - over 200 million dollars in tv, dvd and merchandise sales and is the most sold and watched Warner Bros. tv show worldwide)

Isnt that figure representitive of a 5 year gross? Compared to SR's 5 days....

And yes, technically I want to see Tom Welling's 'run' on Smallville end also. :D

[Kane]

And no offense, Tom Welling in the film role really wouldnt have made a difference as far as the likeability of the portrayal of the character goes.

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=240333&page=4

The vast majority seem to love Brandon Routh. Sadly, you wouldnt get anywhere close to a reaction like this for TW on SHH or BT.

I was even shocked to real on Kryptonsite how so many loved BR's performance and prefer TW to remain playing the teenage character on Smallville while BR plays Superman.

As far as revenues go, from what Ive observed on Smallville fansites....pretty much the vast majority of SV viewers saw the new Superman Returns film anyways....

Their contribution to the film's revenue is likely already counted...so what difference would it really make if the film was a continuation of Smallville...from a financial standpoint?

[hippie_hunter]

And not having good movies like "V for Vendetta", "Road to perdition" and "A history of violence" be made?

But those are Vertigo movies. They aren't really superhero movies like Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, the Flash, Green Lantern, and Aquaman are. You can make movies like Constantine, V for Vendetta, Y the Last Man, Watchmen, A History of Violence, Road to Perdition, Sin City, etc. without over flooding the the comic book movie market.

[hippie_hunter]

Unlike Spider-Man, F4 and other big money successes......Batman and Superman werent bright kid-friendly films..

They were darker, epic and more realistic. They are the perfect tone I want to see WB making movies in....

Only problem is that doesnt sell as well.

Regardless Singer's idea to ground SR on the classic films was still a wise move. They could have fared far worse if general audiences didnt at least have that (the memories of the older films) to spark an interest in this. Superman has been out of the spotlight for some years.

If you think they should have continued Smallville into a feature film, that wouldnt have worked right either;

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/641/supermanfuture018ve.jpg

Even though I loved Superman Returns better than Batman Begins, I bet that the movie would have had a better reception and box office gross if it were a complete restart like Batman Begins and had the costume more like the classic one.

[MrFreeze101]

ok here goes my opinon i really liked the superman returns film there were a few things that bugged me like supes having a son and that lex was nice and dark for the forst part of the film then by the middle went corny and then by the end was a little bit dark again i mean wot the hell beach front proprties i wouldnt have payed lex $2 to live on those hospitable rocks from krypton lol anyways i thought what they could have done was if christopher reeves was alive still started the franchise again he could have been jor-el and brandon as clark/superman and they could have done a storyline where jor-el tries to convince the people of krypton that the planet explodes then brainiac convinces people its not plus the casting out of krypton of General Zod in to the phantom zone and in the second one have him escape but anyways they could have had braniac and lex as the villians and it would have been good then in the second one have zod and darkseid or metallo and the 3rd one mongul and livewire but no bryan followed in the footsteps of donner and tried to make this a sequel to the first one by stealing lines and the same sort of plot from the first superman movie anyways i dont think dc film franchise is under attack i think superman will pull it off but in the next superman film please and i say this on behalf of most general aduiences and comic book fans have a couple of superpowered villians in it for god sake have lex in there but devising a plan with darkseid or mongul or creating metallo or silver banshee so he can take superman on i wanna see supes use his heat vision on someone instead of a plane well thats my opinon sorry if i ranted on for to long

[Ben Urich]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

I agree.
As much as I loved Superman Returns, I don't think it's at all what the general public were expecting.

ok here goes my opinon i really liked the superman returns film there were a few things that bugged me like supes having a son and that lex was nice and dark for the forst part of the film then by the middle went corny and then by the end was a little bit dark again i mean wot the hell beach front proprties i wouldnt have payed lex $2 to live on those hospitable rocks from krypton lol anyways i thought what they could have done was if christopher reeves was alive still started the franchise again he could have been jor-el and brandon as clark/superman and they could have done a storyline where jor-el tries to convince the people of krypton that the planet explodes then brainiac convinces people its not plus the casting out of krypton of General Zod in to the phantom zone and in the second one have him escape but anyways they could have had braniac and lex as the villians and it would have been good then in the second one have zod and darkseid or metallo and the 3rd one mongul and livewire but no bryan followed in the footsteps of donner and tried to make this a sequel to the first one by stealing lines and the same sort of plot from the first superman movie anyways i dont think dc film franchise is under attack i think superman will pull it off but in the next superman film please and i say this on behalf of most general aduiences and comic book fans have a couple of superpowered villians in it for god sake have lex in there but devising a plan with darkseid or mongul or creating metallo or silver banshee so he can take superman on i wanna see supes use his heat vision on someone instead of a plane well thats my opinon sorry if i ranted on for to long

There is not one period in your entire post. :eek:

[DarKush]

I don't think SR is a financial disappointment. It's close to $100 million already. It will make its money back, if not in the US, then worldwide, and plus when it comes out on DVD.

That being said, after reading some of these posts, I don't get some posters trepidation at having a villian other than Luthor in Superman movies.

Don't get me wrong. I do think Luthor was the best way to go for Returns. For me, he is Supes greatest foe, and a lot of casual fans would probably wonder why he wasn't in the movie.

However, I wouldn't have been opposed to using another villian. Brainiac is being used to great effect on Smallville.

And I also think that any sequels need to move beyond Luthor.

Just because the general audience might not know who Metallo or Darkseid are doesn't mean they won't go to movies with them in it.

Superman is the reason they go to see the movie anyway. The greater and more diverse the villian or threat each time, the more crowd pleasing it will be. So that people won't get the feeling of same old, same old.

Besides, on cartoons and TV shows, many people are already familiar with Darkseid, Metallo, Doomsday, etc.

WB's vast marketing machine could easily introduce the new villians. I mean, Zod wasn't all that popular until Superman 2. Let's give some other villians a chance.

[Philly Phanboy]

...And I also think that any sequels need to move beyond Luthor.

Just because the general audience might not know who Metallo or Darkseid are doesn't mean they won't go to movies with them in it.

Superman is the reason they go to see the movie anyway. The greater and more diverse the villian or threat each time, the more crowd pleasing it will be. So that people won't get the feeling of same old, same old.

Besides, on cartoons and TV shows, many people are already familiar with Darkseid, Metallo, Doomsday, etc.

WB's vast marketing machine could easily introduce the new villians. I mean, Zod wasn't all that popular until Superman 2. Let's give some other villians a chance.

Singer returning means we'll only see Luthor. :down:(

[Superman4ever]

$ 600 million and they didnt even make a sequal:eek:

They were going to...T2: IE (Iceburg Elimination)

[Philly Phanboy]

ok here goes my opinon i really liked the superman returns film there were a few things that bugged me like supes having a son and that lex was nice and dark for the forst part of the film then by the middle went corny and then by the end was a little bit dark again i mean wot the hell beach front proprties i wouldnt have payed lex $2 to live on those hospitable rocks from krypton lol anyways i thought what they could have done was if christopher reeves was alive still started the franchise again he could have been jor-el and brandon as clark/superman and they could have done a storyline where jor-el tries to convince the people of krypton that the planet explodes then brainiac convinces people its not plus the casting out of krypton of General Zod in to the phantom zone and in the second one have him escape but anyways they could have had braniac and lex as the villians and it would have been good then in the second one have zod and darkseid or metallo and the 3rd one mongul and livewire but no bryan followed in the footsteps of donner and tried to make this a sequel to the first one by stealing lines and the same sort of plot from the first superman movie anyways i dont think dc film franchise is under attack i think superman will pull it off but in the next superman film please and i say this on behalf of most general aduiences and comic book fans have a couple of superpowered villians in it for god sake have lex in there but devising a plan with darkseid or mongul or creating metallo or silver banshee so he can take superman on i wanna see supes use his heat vision on someone instead of a plane well thats my opinon sorry if i ranted on for to long

There is not one period in your entire post. :eek:

LOL. :):up:

[Superman4ever]

ok here goes my opinon i really liked the superman returns film there were a few things that bugged me like supes having a son and that lex was nice and dark for the forst part of the film then by the middle went corny and then by the end was a little bit dark again i mean wot the hell beach front proprties i wouldnt have payed lex $2 to live on those hospitable rocks from krypton lol anyways i thought what they could have done was if christopher reeves was alive still started the franchise again he could have been jor-el and brandon as clark/superman and they could have done a storyline where jor-el tries to convince the people of krypton that the planet explodes then brainiac convinces people its not plus the casting out of krypton of General Zod in to the phantom zone and in the second one have him escape but anyways they could have had braniac and lex as the villians and it would have been good then in the second one have zod and darkseid or metallo and the 3rd one mongul and livewire but no bryan followed in the footsteps of donner and tried to make this a sequel to the first one by stealing lines and the same sort of plot from the first superman movie anyways i dont think dc film franchise is under attack i think superman will pull it off but in the next superman film please and i say this on behalf of most general aduiences and comic book fans have a couple of superpowered villians in it for god sake have lex in there but devising a plan with darkseid or mongul or creating metallo or silver banshee so he can take superman on i wanna see supes use his heat vision on someone instead of a plane well thats my opinon sorry if i ranted on for to long

Whoa, longest run on setence ever! Theoretically, this thing could go on forever...hhhmmmmm. ;)

...i wanna see supes use his heat vision on someone instead of a plane well thats my opinon sorry if i ranted on for to long

but I just felt that I had to get that off my chest but i really think a supervillian would have been so cool and [hypsters continue]

[Philly Phanboy]

Nolan will continue with Batman.

But I doubt WB would take chances on lesser heroes if Superman doesnt sell.

And about Goyer and Whedon, it wouldnt be the first time WB threw out scripts in production.

Look at how many scripts were scrapped for Superman over the past decade and longer.

It really depends on the scale of those other movies. The only other "event" level DC hero on the horizon is probably Wonder Woman that might warrant a larger budget. In the case of Wonder Woman, I'm of the growing impression that they might be best to postpone production until they can film two or more movies back-to-back to better manage their budget. :O

[Ben Urich]

I think the problem with Singer's use of Luthor wasn't the fact that it was Lex; it was that, because of the nature of the remake, they had to go on with that silly notion that Lex is some egocentric master criminal with a hardon for land. It's a lame motivation. I'd have prefered a fresher take on Luthor as a businessman whom the public revere, but who privately loathes and distrusts Superman.
If I had my way, Superman Returns 2 would show Lex "going clean" - IE serving prison time, returning his ill-gotten gains, and establishing LexCorp, where he'd invest heavily in cloning. Bizarro, anyone?

[dpm07]

I think the problem with Singer's use of Luthor wasn't the fact that it was Lex; it was that, because of the nature of the remake, they had to go on with that silly notion that Lex is some egocentric master criminal with a hardon for land. It's a lame motivation. I'd have prefered a fresher take on Luthor as a businessman whom the public revere, but who privately loathes and distrusts Superman.
If I had my way, Superman Returns 2 would show Lex "going clean" - IE serving prison time, returning his ill-gotten gains, and establishing LexCorp, where he'd invest heavily in cloning. Bizarro, anyone?

I agree with everything you said. My only change would have been Metallo instead of Bizarro, but you're right on the subject of your statement. :up:

[Bruce_Wayne29]

And no offense, Tom Welling in the film role really wouldnt have made a difference as far as the likeability of the portrayal of the character goes.

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=240333&page=4

The vast majority seem to love Brandon Routh. Sadly, you wouldnt get anywhere close to a reaction like this for TW on SHH or BT.

I was even shocked to real on Kryptonsite how so many loved BR's performance and prefer TW to remain playing the teenage character on Smallville while BR plays Superman.




Trust me, it would. And the answer to those 2 points you mentioned are very simple: Smallville fans prefer to see Routh (the other fans like him because he looks like Chris and because they are blindly loyal to Singer, had he chosen Caviezel, Cage or James Marsden they would still blindly support him) to play Superman in THAT movie because they didn't want Tom Welling in Superman Returns, they wanted him to play the role in a movie that either followed where the show ended or in something totally new. They didn't want him to play the role being made up to be Reeve and do a remake of Superman the movie.

[Ben Urich]

I agree with everything you said. My only change would have been Metallo instead of Bizarro, but you're right on the subject of your statement. :up:

Why not both? :confused: :up:
Talk about your action scenes. :eek::D:up:

[Kane]

So I still dont understand your point? What difference would Tom Welling have made (if he was cast as Superman) from a gross profits point of view compared to Brandon Routh when the majority of the TW supporters within the SV fan community saw SR anyways and already contributed to its revenue?

[Lestat74]

frankly, we can have Lexcorp Lex in the next movie WITHOUT any jail time...I mean, how are they gonna pin the whole "New Krypton" thing on him anyways? There's no evidence. Plus, he's a newly minted Billionaire...maybe there was a Vanderworth Industries that he can now turn into LexCorp. Plus, as a very rich man he could hire the best lawyers now. If they wanted to send him to jail they would have. They didn't on purpose.

[Kane]

It really depends on the scale of those other movies. The only other "event" level DC hero on the horizon is probably Wonder Woman that might warrant a larger budget. In the case of Wonder Woman, I'm of the growing impression that they might be best to postpone production until they can film two or more movies back-to-back to better manage their budget. :O

I think the majority of other DC franchaises would require a larger budget.

WW would need a Superman-like budget for alot of insane special effects; Bullet-time, flying, creating Paradise Island etc..

The Flash would also need alot of special effects if they want to make it cool.

GL would likely need more SFX compared to Superman; for flight, the light constructs etc..

Shazam would need a similar budget to Superman too given the type of similar powers that Capt Marvel has, including flight.


If Superman fails in WB's eyes, the future of these other projects just seem grim.

[Ben Urich]

I think the majority of other DC franchaises would require a larger budget.

WW would need a Superman-like budget for alot of insane special effects; Bullet-time, flying, creating Paradise Island etc..
No bullet time :down

[GL's Light]

Superman and Green Lantern need big budgets, but other characters could be brought in on more moderate amounts.

The Flash could be very expensive or only moderately expensive depending on how big you go with the FX. Speed effects could be created quite cheaply using simple techniques, or they could cost a ton if you go all out and use cutting edge techniques.

Wonder Woman, too, could have a big budget or a moderate budget depending on how you design the film.

If you have talented filmmakers who know how to get great production values on a moderate budget you don't have to spend a fortune on every superhero movie.

[CConn]

I think the problem with Singer's use of Luthor wasn't the fact that it was Lex; it was that, because of the nature of the remake, they had to go on with that silly notion that Lex is some egocentric master criminal with a hardon for land. It's a lame motivation. I'd have prefered a fresher take on Luthor as a businessman whom the public revere, but who privately loathes and distrusts Superman.
If I had my way, Superman Returns 2 would show Lex "going clean" - IE serving prison time, returning his ill-gotten gains, and establishing LexCorp, where he'd invest heavily in cloning. Bizarro, anyone?That's what I'd like to see. Although I might have it build a bit more slowly.

[Kane]

No bullet time :down

But there needs to be some shots of WW reflecting bullets with her arm things, they'll likely slow that down.

The problem is...just that one shot of Superman getting a bullet in the eye cost 2 million dollars....

So it is more expensive than it looks.


I guess the advantage of Batman is he had no superpowers, thus alot less CG work needed.

[thedarks0ldier]

Movies like ROTS cost about $113 million, the most expensive LOTH cost about $95 million, so i dont see why Superman cost 185 million

[LEDZEPPELIN]

The guy that posted this got ahead of himself. SR is doing very well, and it hasn't been released in Central America, South America, and Europe yet.

Next time, give it a little more time before you start predicting DC's doom.

[Kane]

Hey it wasnt a prediction at all. It was just examining the possibility of this possible situation....which is still in the realm of realistic outcomes.

[Lestat74]

No matter what Superman would have done at the Box Office, they are NOT going to spend more than $80 Million on Wonder Woman. NO female driven action flicks have done well with the exception of Tomb Raider and the first Charlie's Angels. Both of which made only $130 million or so. So WW will have a far smaller budget, as will Flash, because he is a lesser known character. Their expectations for these characters will be far LESS than Bats and Supes.

[Ben Urich]

But there needs to be some shots of WW reflecting bullets with her arm things, they'll likely slow that down.

The problem is...just that one shot of Superman getting a bullet in the eye cost 2 million dollars....

So it is more expensive than it looks.


I guess the advantage of Batman is he had no superpowers, thus alot less CG work needed.

I know that they need the deflection shots, but not too many of them.
I loved the first Matrix movie, but I will forever hate it also because of all the copycat **** it spawned. :down

[WTFwuzThT]

WB is sitting on a gold mine with both Superman and Batman. Unfortunately they both have underwhelming movies. Batman was at best mediocre and Superman is well... not good. it's unfortunate.

[thechubbysaint]

They really need to go back to having these heroes as 'serials.' (3-6 movies near back to back) It most mimics their comic form, have '24' type cliff-hangers, and will be more character driven than eye candy.

Basically they need to plan out the movies over a time arc.
P

[cheney4prez2008]

Anyone here thinks that Wonder Woman will do better than Superman Returns at the B.O.?

[CConn]

They really need to go back to having these heroes as 'serials.' (3-6 movies near back to back) It most mimics their comic form, have '24' type cliff-hangers, and will be more character driven than eye candy.

Basically they need to plan out the movies over a time arc.
PThey're starting to do that now a bit. Nolan and Goyer planned out BB2 and 3 pretty early on, and I remember Singer having said he has stuff planned for SR2 and 3.

[Katsuro]

WB is sitting on a gold mine with both Superman and Batman. Unfortunately they both have underwhelming movies. Batman was at best mediocre and Superman is well... not good. it's unfortunate.

I'll agree with you on Batman, it was mediocre at best. Batman Begins, on the other hand, was fantastic!

[ChrisBaleBatman]

They're both critical hits, and Batman Begins made a ton of cash and Superman Returns can still make more money, IMO.

They do need to expand it all though, don't just throw all the weight on the Two Greatest Heroes.....Bats and Supes. They need to get Wonder Woman out, get the Flash ready to go, and start planning others as well. GL is a must make. They could even go with more obscure ones too.

[Marvel Man]

Geez SuperMan has only been out for like a week and yall are saying its the end of it? It has a month or two before u get a general idea what the last amount will come to. As for Batman, that will go on to atleast three movies.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

lol, yup. Superman's been out for only a week.....and all of a sudden, the world is devouring itself......people can be pretty spazzy.

[Marvel Man]

lol, yup. Superman's been out for only a week.....and all of a sudden, the world is devouring itself......people can be pretty spazzy.

I know i mean just let the Box Office be and if your getting so worked up about it just go see the fricking movie again to help out! lol

[ChrisBaleBatman]

lol, Exactly man.

I dunno, one problem I have is this notion that we all need to defeat the Spidey numbers. I don't think any film can do that. Spidey really rode an incredible wave that summer, and hasn't gotten off since. It's like "Oh, if you can't beat out Spidey's numbers....you suck" or something. If I had my way, ALL comic films would ****ing pwn all the time. It'd be good for all fans.

I seriously think Superman Returns will do fine. The numbers will go up, and that'll be that. I'm defintely going to go see it again for sure.

Wonder Woman would draw a TON of female audiences. AND, if the actress they get to play her is hot.....TONS of guys. It's playing into both genders, a WIN WIN situation I think.

[Lestat74]

Wonder Woman is my favorite DC character. I adore her....BUT....no matter what Superman Returns ends up making, Wonder Woman won't make nearly as much. Female action heroes just don't sell that well. at best, she'll get around 125-130 million. Sadly, we live in a sexist society. But Wondy is an Icon, so that could help her. But she will never be in the Superman/Batman/X-Men league in terms of #'s. And Warners knows this, and the movie won't have near the budget. But since Joss Whedon is doing it, I ain't too worried, becuse he can make great entertainment that's more about character than spectacle.

[CConn]

I wouldn't say it's sexism at all. If you'll notice, all the movies with female action heroes that have done poorly, were, well, bad movies. The movies that were actually good, did perfectly well. Terminator, Aliens, Kill Bill, etc.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I dunno, I think we live in a feminist society. I think Wonder Woman is the exception, simply b/c she's the IT of all female heroes to ever exist. And....if she's smoking hot.....Guys will go see her.

But....there might be fanboys who are afraid of a woman pwning all though....

[dpm07]

I wouldn't say it's sexism at all. If you'll notice, all the movies with female action heroes that have done poorly, were, well, bad movies. The movies that were actually good, did perfectly well. Terminator, Aliens, Kill Bill, etc.

This is a true statement. Look at those movies that were mentioned. They succeeded because they were good films. SR was a bit underwhelming and flat like day old cola left out. Batman Begins, IMO rocked on many levels and I think the sequel will even be better.

A female film can succeed but it does have to be written well, and attention needs to be paid by using the resource material out there so it doesn't become a CINO.

[Ben Urich]

lol, yup. Superman's been out for only a week.....and all of a sudden, the world is devouring itself......people can be pretty spazzy.

I think the Superman fans are even more persnickety than the Spider-Man ones. :eek:
Probably because they're, like, 35 years older. :o :D

[Prognosticator]

Anyone here thinks that Wonder Woman will do better than Superman Returns at the B.O.?

There's NO way! This is the biggest misconception today, that WW would hold her own. Don't get me wrong, it's definitely a "$100 mil" worthy at the B.O., but there is no REAL WW following?? Plus, no one's really clammoring for a WW movie except for the fact that we know they're making one to begin with.

WB would be set to introduce a Flash movie, but staking all DC franchises on WW's B.O. will be a mistake.

[Prognosticator]

The good thing about SR overall response is Joss Whedon is still in the multiple-drafting process. He still has time to go back and make corrections according to the negative reactions from SR...i.e., he can amp up the ass-kickedness of the movie!

[thechubbysaint]

There are alot of males that still remember Linda Carter in that outfit. I wouldn't underestimate WW inactive fan base.

As for the action, it is a bit different with WW. You are supposed to suspend belief because she is superpowered.

Now Charlie's Angels with three regular powered anorexic looking women is not believable. Not sexist, but it is kinda hard to take them as 'ass kickers' of lots of evil men.

[CConn]

The thing that worries me most about Wonder Woman's box office is Whedon, actually. It seems like no one outside of his cult following gives a damn about his work. Buffy was a TV show on a third-rate network, Firefly was cancelled, Serenity bombed, and his only really successful movie script was Toy Story - and he wrote that with others.

If I was WB, I just wouldn't be very confident in staking too much money on him.

[Lestat74]

yeah, but Warners knows Whedon will make a quality film, which could help differentiate WW from other camp-fests like Catwoman and Bloodrayne. They're hoping that the Whedon pedigree will propel the movie to success. All I'm saying is that WW will not be expected to be a blockbuster in the Superman/Batman way. Success is relative. they will spend less, so I'm sure they'll be thrilled if they make more than $100 million.

[thechubbysaint]

With anything, it depends on word of mouth. BB's word of mouth kept it going. The bad press SR's got has dampened what should have been Spiderman numbers.

[CrypticOne]

Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.

If SR does indeed prove unprofitable, there will likely be no sequels (given the massive budget it requires).

This may likely also convince WB to NOT continue the DC superhero movies and NOT to take chances on the lesser known heroes when Superman proved to be unpopular.

Flash, Wonder Woman, Shazam, Green Lantern etc...Big budget DC Superhero films like these likely wont happen if Superman proves unprofitable.

Even though Batman Begins will be the only ones to continue, its unlikely we'll see other DC Superheroes step up into these big budget films if Superman is a failure.......

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future.

Discuss.

I'm saying continue with the Batman Begins franchise and the Superman Returns franchise. DC needs to focus on those two and those two only. I wouldn't like those other DC movies coming out, because some of those characters can't hold a movie on there own.

I hope SR gets at least two more movies. They just need to have some good villains in them.

[IAmHe9]

I was bale to find this oneline:



Just so everyone is on the same page. :)

Exactly. The tax break puts it at $184 million, while I said it was $185 million. The estimation that it's at $200 million is hypthothetical; it's a guess what the budget would've been like without the tax break.

[dnno1]

I saw Superman Returns on Monday and thought it was an excellent story. I saw a 911 moment in it (a man falling out of a building, but Superman saved him), a little bit of King Arthur in it (the Arthur, Sir Lancelot, and Quenivier triangle were Superman was wounded -- like Sir Lancelot), and a little of the "Passion of the Christ" (Luthor and his cronies kicking the snot out of Superman- --and Lois saved him). The scene where Superman hoisted the land mass into space was reminicent of our modern day atheletes who have to "suck-it-up" and play with pain or injuries in the big game, except superman super-sucks-it up facing near death from Kryptonite poisoning while lifting a land mass the size of a continent. I think that some of these stunts had to be done to show the true power of Superman and the fact that he has the heart of a true hero (more than most heroes that we worship). There is no end to the DC movie franchise (right now or ever) as long as they make films like this one and we will be talking about it in forums, in books, and in college classrooms for years to come. I recomend that every one go see this one because it is a classic in the making.

[Ben Urich]

I wouldn't like those other DC movies coming out, because some of those characters can't hold a movie on there own.

Do you read comic books? :confused:

[CConn]

I've noticed any character can be a good character with a good writer. And any film can be a good film with a good director. Not that I'd want to see a 12-part film series about the Elongated Man or anything.

[boywonder13]

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=241001 - Discuss Here

From CBR Article: http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/newsitem.cgi?id=7735

Last year's big WB superhero release, "Batman Begins" didn't cross the $100 million mark until day ten, making "Superman Returns" an equally well-reviewed and more profitable film. This upward trend bodes well for WB's next superhero flick, "Wonder Woman," and will no doubt encourage fast tracking of the oft-discussed "Green Lantern" and "Flash" films

[Hollywoodland]

I wish that article was from WB and not CBR.

I want to hear them confirm that Superman's results are successful enough and they want to make GL, Flash and WW happen.

[Cinemaman]

Well, I think SR will make $215m domesticly and $453m in worldwide.

WB will make sequels of SR, because they think sequels will make more than 1st movie, and they are right.

I doubt Wonder Woman will make more than even $150m, it will be potential bomb.

But BB2 and SR2 will make higher numbers, what means success in box office.

My predictions are:

BB2
Opening weekend: $62m
Domestic: $255m
Overseas: $186m
Worldwide: $441m

SR2
Opening weekend: $68m
Domestic: $263m
Overseas: $288m
Worldwide: $553m

Flash and GL will also make solid numbers.

So I think better will be, if WB continues making superhero movie, but with smarter vission.

I mean, they should make smarter promotion for BB2 and give Singer $180m to make SR2.

[BrianWilly]

I wish that article was from WB and not CBR.

I want to hear them confirm that Superman's results are successful enough and they want to make GL, Flash and WW happen.
The WB has already said that they were pleased with the results. Several times. I think everyone is just expecting far too much, as if them suits should be rolling out the parade and blasting champagne everywhere or something. As movie grosses go, Superman Returns is doing well and the WB has released positive statements. What more should they do?

Chillax, everyone, it'll all be okay;).

[dpm07]

The WB has already said that they were pleased with the results. Several times. I think everyone is just expecting far too much, as if them suits should be rolling out the parade and blasting champagne everywhere or something. As movie grosses go, Superman Returns is doing well and the WB has released positive statements. What more should they do?

Chillax, everyone, it'll all be okay;).

You do realize they are putting a positive spin on things, don't you? You can't really believe that they think the film is doing what they privately thought or hoped it would do. We are talking about WB after all, and this was supposed to be their crown jewel of a film for superheroes. It is falling flat. It's boring, and really not well-written. WB is not going to say, "Our film sucks" anymore than if it were blowing everything out of the water they'd say, "We knew we have a monster film, it's just the greatest thing in the world". PR has to put a positive spin on things, while they can privately assess the direction if any for the next film to be made.

[BrianWilly]

Yes I do realize this, since you've already told me.

I also realize that this kind of attitude is pointless and illogical, since by this way of thinking they could just be lying about anything they say, so what the heck's the point of listening to anything they say at all?

You're letting your own negative attitude about the movie influence the way you think other people feel about it. They could say that they've orgasmed all night over these numbers, and you'd just say that they're trying to put a positive spin on things. How do you know what the WB thinks? No one does, except them. The only thing we have to go by is what they tell us. And they tell us that they're happy. Could they be lying? Of course. But by that same exact line of logic, they could say they're unhappy and I could just say that they're lying for whatever reason. So I choose to take them at their word since I have no logical evidence otherwise. You can't just claim something with no evidence and assume that it's true.

Someone said that they wished WB would release some positive statements, and I said they already have. That's just all there is to it.

[Lestat74]

Yeah, what does anyone expect the WB to say? they had a $100 million + Opening Week, if they complain it looks really, really bad on their part. Did they want/expect it to make more? Of course, we all did. But if they complain about a weekend like that it will make them look like really big cry-babies. Superman Returns is, like Batman Begins and King Kong before it, a succesful film, just not MEGA succesful. What's wrong with that? I'd rather have a mature, thoughtful Superman film that makes less than a testosterone fueled ADD Driven Toy commercial any day. I'm thrilled Warners had the guts to go with a more mature take. I easily put Superman Returns only slightly under Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins, and X2 as great modern comic book films. It's Eons ahead of X3, Fanatstic Four, Daredevil, Hulk ( Which, I think, is at least and interesting failure ) and even Spider-Man 1 and X-Men. Although I loved both of those. We geeks should be happy instead of *****ing....we are getting actual good films made from the comics we love, not just mildly entertaining movies with no substance. Remember the 90's guys?? Batman Forever, Batman & Robin, Steel, Spawn.....we've come a long way baby. Even FF and Daredevil are better than all of those. Sheesh.

[warpdrive]

yeah, that is a shame, sometimes people can be picky:confused:. I liked sR, sure it had a retro feel to it especially the end when he was flying. It might require some risk to keep DC in the box office, may have to take a chance and show the critics that comics can make great movies, they don't have to stay in the comics. I personally think that is the critics problem, I don't think it has anything to do with the quality of the film, even though batman begins and SR were high quality, I think they have their minds made up that certain comic book heroes or maybe all only belong in the comics.

[Zilleraut #66]

I think that people are forgeting that Batman and Superman are coming away from some very crippling movie franchises. People still laugh at those old movies and think that more of the same will come. It doesn't help that HBO has been showing the older Batman movies more than BB. Why the WB always has to smother this character in cartoony-ness is beyond me?

Its sad to say but I think that the next Batman movie will be lighter, funner and happier. I have faith that Nolan would walk away before letting Batman go fairytale on us again so at least we would have a sign not to see the next Batman movie.

[boywonder13]

I think that people are forgeting that Batman and Superman are coming away from some very crippling movie franchises. People still laugh at those old movies and think that more of the same will come. It doesn't help that HBO has been showing the older Batman movies more than BB. Why the WB always has to smother this character in cartoony-ness is beyond me?

Its sad to say but I think that the next Batman movie will be lighter, funner and happier. I have faith that Nolan would walk away before letting Batman go fairytale on us again so at least we would have a sign not to see the next Batman movie.

Nolan is doing the next batman movie and will proably doing the third back to back.

it won't be lighter....I tihnk I read some reports about this possibly being darker maybe with a little sex added into it...

[Ben Urich]

I don't want sex in a Batman movie.
Really, sex doesn't have a place in superhero comic book movies at all. Superman II did it tastefully, but the theatrical cut of Daredevil... :(

[Infamy]

They need for the sequal for Supes to beating and getting beat around by Doomsday or Darkseid or someone along those lines that can really put in some epic action, all this natural disaster thing is getting old and fast, Returns..although they call it a restart is more of a re-introduction. Begins was a restart and is better for it, Returns is a re-introduction but it poses more questions about the future of the franchise than it does answers.

After Begins came out, even with the "lackluster" opening box office (thank god for positive word of mouth) even with that there was NEVER any doubt that there would be a sequal. Thats because the general public know whats coming next, the studio the writers the director the star all know what they need to do next to make it better. With Returns people are just kinda sat there scratching there heads, where do we go from here?

Although people would of scoffed at the mere thought, maybe the previous attached directors (in thought process only not actual plans..robotic suits anyone? suits in a can?) were right, maybe Superman DID need a complete reboot from origin up, something like "Birthright" or something, to freshen things up. Just seems that although the movie for the most part is apparently good (ive not seen it) there is as much questions and uncertainty as there was before Singer came on board. I dont think it's Singers fault either, I just think WB should of stuck to there guns and rebooted it as opposed to all this brief origin tied into 1 and 2 stuff, the Donner movies (well 1 and most of 2) were great as was Burtons Batman (well err 1 and err most of 2) just leave them there and reboot.

Well thats my 2 cents anyway, im sure there would be other thoughts from other people but I just think its an opportunity missed, which they probably thought considering the money they've spent thus far and the backlash they had to other ideas WB probably just wanted something "safe" and thats what they got with Superman Returns a "Safe" movie.

[Golgo-13]

They need for the sequal for Supes to beating and getting beat around by Doomsday or Darkseid or someone along those lines that can really put in some epic action, all this natural disaster thing is getting old and fast, Returns..although they call it a restart is more of a re-introduction. Begins was a restart and is better for it, Returns is a re-introduction but it poses more questions about the future of the franchise than it does answers.

After Begins came out, even with the "lackluster" opening box office (thank god for positive word of mouth) even with that there was NEVER any doubt that there would be a sequal. Thats because the general public know whats coming next, the studio the writers the director the star all know what they need to do next to make it better. With Returns people are just kinda sat there scratching there heads, where do we go from here?

Although people would of scoffed at the mere thought, maybe the previous attached directors (in thought process only not actual plans..robotic suits anyone? suits in a can?) were right, maybe Superman DID need a complete reboot from origin up, something like "Birthright" or something, to freshen things up. Just seems that although the movie for the most part is apparently good (ive not seen it) there is as much questions and uncertainty as there was before Singer came on board. I dont think it's Singers fault either, I just think WB should of stuck to there guns and rebooted it as opposed to all this brief origin tied into 1 and 2 stuff, the Donner movies (well 1 and most of 2) were great as was Burtons Batman (well err 1 and err most of 2) just leave them there and reboot.

Well thats my 2 cents anyway, im sure there would be other thoughts from other people but I just think its an opportunity missed, which they probably thought considering the money they've spent thus far and the backlash they had to other ideas WB probably just wanted something "safe" and thats what they got with Superman Returns a "Safe" movie.

I agree. A reboot of the 'entire' franchise is what we needed not an 'insert' into the existing old one. I'd have like to see an updated Kryton destruction and origin story, then the Lex Luther angle would not have been so played out. Ah, wishful thinking.

[JBElliott]

Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.

Superman Returns was an amazingly BAD film which is why it's doing badly at the box office. The marketing campaign by WB was the standard lame attempt as usual.

I hope that all DC film projects go back to basics and let Dini and Timm take the helm since they've been the most successful at translating the comics into another medium.

[Warhammer]

Superman Returns was an amazingly BAD film which is why it's doing badly at the box office. The marketing campaign by WB was the standard lame attempt as usual.

I hope that all DC film projects go back to basics and let Dini and Timm take the helm since they've been the most successful at translating the comics into another medium.

Imagine anything from Dini/Timm in live action!!!!!!!!!!
They'd make a Catman movie good.

[hippie_hunter]

Superman Returns was an amazingly BAD film which is why it's doing badly at the box office.

*bangs head on desk repeatedly*

Superman Returns has a 79% Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It is doing better than Batman Begins. It is #1 at the box office. It has made over $100 million and is still rising. It still has other markets to open in. And it's huge-ass budget that the media reports includes over ten years plus of trying to get a fifth Superman movie off the ground. This movie is a success despite what your retarded logic says. And BTW, the movie f**king rocked!

[Speedball]

I don't want sex in a Batman movie.
Really, sex doesn't have a place in superhero comic book movies at all. Superman II did it tastefully, but the theatrical cut of Daredevil... :(

Sex in a batman movie is okay, as long as it's Catwoman, Talia, or maybe Sasha Bordeaux. and it should done tastefully, and not make the rating higher or be WAY too much is seen.

[Ben Urich]

Sex in a batman movie is okay, as long as it's Catwoman, Talia, or maybe Sasha Bordeaux. and it should done tastefully, and not make the rating higher or be WAY too much is seen.

There is a way to do it tastefully, and I'm sure that Nolan could do that.
I just don't want romance to dominate the story UNLESS IT'S TALIA. :o

[Speedball]

I wouldn't mind seeing Sasha, at least she would have a legitmate reason to disappear (Checkmate).

[Amisfitdirector]

SR needed a way better writing staff, .....and a better lois lane....and a better story........and a better director.......and um....i think thats everything....another superman..call it superman is dead! cause thats what he is to me now....dead......thanks alot hollywood, you have done it again....i ear....yes i am a man and i am crting....don't make fun of me lol i am just saying sometimes we gotta look at it the way do. MONEY HAHAHAHA yea if anyone should have been lex luthor it should have been the WB

[WarBlade]

Superman Returns was an amazingly BAD film which is why it's doing badly at the box office. The marketing campaign by WB was the standard lame attempt as usual.
Utter rubbish. Superman Returns is not a bad film. The reason why it has been doing abysmal sales is quite simply that the general masses don't give a toss about Superman, so they don't bother to see it.

[hippie_hunter]

I think that people are forgeting that Batman and Superman are coming away from some very crippling movie franchises. People still laugh at those old movies and think that more of the same will come. It doesn't help that HBO has been showing the older Batman movies more than BB. Why the WB always has to smother this character in cartoony-ness is beyond me?

Its sad to say but I think that the next Batman movie will be lighter, funner and happier. I have faith that Nolan would walk away before letting Batman go fairytale on us again so at least we would have a sign not to see the next Batman movie.

Not gonna happen. Recent reports are showing that Batman 2 will be even darker than Batman Begins

[hippie_hunter]

SR needed a way better writing staff, .....and a better lois lane....and a better story........and a better director.......and um....i think thats everything....another superman..call it superman is dead! cause thats what he is to me now....dead......thanks alot hollywood, you have done it again....i ear....yes i am a man and i am crting....don't make fun of me lol i am just saying sometimes we gotta look at it the way do. MONEY HAHAHAHA yea if anyone should have been lex luthor it should have been the WB

God damnit. Why the hell does every hater except dpm come off as a complete idiot :mad:

[Galactical]

i read that a lot, warblade. "But it's the people that are the problem." It's never just one thing to me though. In theory it could possibly be because it was a sub-par film that relies too heavily on nostalgia to give it legs to stand on and uses tasteless shock value like passion of the christ to bluntly compel you to feel something.

But that's really unpopular to say...

I believe this myself that people may have not liked this movie because it's a pretty depressing, and unexciting superman film that ends where it really begins to get interesting and contains a lot of weird stuff, but who knows... Maybe they have some conspiracy against superman. I don't know. People these days yunno...

[superion]

*bangs head on desk repeatedly*

Superman Returns has a 79% Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It is doing better than Batman Begins. It is #1 at the box office. It has made over $100 million and is still rising. It still has other markets to open in. And it's huge-ass budget that the media reports includes over ten years plus of trying to get a fifth Superman movie off the ground. This movie is a success despite what your retarded logic says. And BTW, the movie f**king rocked!

It has a 75% freah rating. Good but hardly great. That is lower then the first X-Men which I thought was just a average movie and way lower then the first Spiderman.

As for doing better then Begins, with the opening of Pirates Returns BO just took a big hit and its second weekend take will be less then Begins second weekend of $27 million by about $5 to $7 million and it will now make less then Begins for its remaining weeks so whether it ends up with more then Begins is still in doubt.

[WarBlade]

i read that a lot, warblade. "But it's the people that are the problem." It's never just one thing to me though. In theory it could possibly be because it was a sub-par film that relies too heavily on nostalgia to give it legs to stand on and uses tasteless shock value like passion of the christ to bluntly compel you to feel something.

But that's really unpopular to say...
I wouldn't say the people are the problem either. The people just aren't interested. For the most part they don't even get far enough in the door to think things like "sub par film" "relying heavily on nostalgia" that "uses tasteless shock value". What most will be thinking is, "A Superman film? Meh. What else is on?"

I believe this myself that people may have not liked this movie because it's a pretty depressing, and unexciting superman film that ends where it really begins to get interesting and contains a lot of weird stuff, but who knows... Maybe they have some conspiracy against superman. I don't know. People these days yunno...
Conspiracy theory now? I think if there was ever a conspiracy theory it was probably here on the Hype with fans trying to convince the rest of us that Superman Returns was going to be a huge hit or something. :D

Personally, I figured it would be a moderate success over in the States and a wet fish everywhere else. I'm actually surprised that every report I've read of projectionists and managers around the world is of poor turnout. From what I can gather it's looking more like a wet fish with a led sinker in it's mouth everywhere.

[The Batman]

If you ask me, the reasons both SR and BB didnt deliver lie solely on WB wanting to please the fans, who asked for darker, mature versions of the characters.

And when you ask for that, you lose potential audiences. And before some of you whine and scream that somehow appealing to audiences means camp, just look Batman 89', Donners Superman films, Raimi's Spider-Man flicks, and the first two x-movies.

If WB actually tries to make these movies for audiences and for fans too, then maybe supes and bats will be the hit movies they're supposed to be

[dpm07]

If you ask me, the reasons both SR and BB didnt deliver lie solely on WB wanting to please the fans, who asked for darker, mature versions of the characters.

And when you ask for that, you lose potential audiences. And before some of you whine and scream that somehow appealing to audiences means camp, just look Batman 89', Donners Superman films, Raimi's Spider-Man flicks, and the first two x-movies.

If WB actually tries to make these movies for audiences and for fans too, then maybe supes and bats will be the hit movies they're supposed to be

The reason why SR didn't do well is because Singer dropped the ball. Plain and simple. He had the chance to really make his mark, and his devotion to the original film distanced him from fans. If he'd done a reboot and thrown in a supervillain, or a version of Lex that had LexCorps, then this might have been a better film. Adding the kid was a mistake as well, IMO. This movie lost it's momentum with Superman Returns when it became Jason's Arrival. There was one great moment in the film. The plane sequence. Other than that, the film was flat. Singer is to blame for this debacle. Not the fans, not anyone else but Singer and the whack pack of Harris and Daugherty. This film had a great concept idea with the return, but it was a poorly detailed story that was delivered and executed, and the box office is reflecting this.

The sad testament is this: They've already played the return card, so if the franchise takes a few years off and comes back, one really can't call it Superman Returns again. Singer missed a lot of opportunities with this film because his ego only allowed him the tunnel vision of looking at the Donner film as a resource or the Fleisher cartoons, and by doing this, he really turned off today's audience.

While I am disappointed, I do believe Singer will be back for a sequel. It's sad, but I don't see WB letting him go. He'll probably be faced with a choice: Either make a film that WB controls more with regard to creativity, or he'll be allowed to leave on his own accord. Sadly, I think his whack pack writing team should be shown the door, but I think Singer will use whatever leverage he has to keep them there.

[The Batman]

your extremely biased opinion on SR aside, the fans are still to blame for SR happening in the first place.

It was the fans who rejected Abrhams superman, asking for something more traditional. And WB werent gonna just rehash the donner film like most of you want. thats why all the crappy changes that were made in ratners/mcg's superman were made in the first place. The sooner people realize this, the better.

And then, Singer comes in, with a take on superman thats traditional, like the fans wanted, and uses the tradtional origin and continuity established by donner.

So yes, the fans are, in part responisble for what we got in SR.

[dpm07]

And then, Singer comes in, with a take on superman thats traditional, like the fans wanted, and uses the tradtional origin and continuity established by donner.

So yes, the fans are, in part responisble for what we got in SR.

Not really. If the fans had liked Singer's take, they'd have embraced it more. Singer provided a poor film, and the box office is reflecting that. The lack of action, the introduction of a child, and sticking to the Donner film which is pretty old, are factors that hurt it.

One can defend Singer all they want, but the cold harsh reality is that Singer had his chance, and because of his insistence on doing things his way, and having a good concept but with a poorly written story and characters (Stanford and Kitty) really assisted with the contribution of hurting this film. The acting was good. However, the dialogue at times was weak, and having Kal Penn, Parker Posey, and Peta Wilson perform the particular roles they did, was a waste of their talent. They could all have been used more productively.

[The Batman]

I'm talking about why SR didnt do well....i'm not whining about why singer chose not to do my superman. you can scream your head off about how singers wrong for not doing a live action STAS or whatever, but i dont really care, as most people arent complaining about the donner details besides a minority of post crisis fanboys. the general audience dosent give a rats ass about post crisis or the donner movies. Not to mention the majority of superman fans liked the movie, as polls indicate.

[dpm07]

I'm talking about why SR didnt do well....i'm not whining about why singer chose not to do my superman. you can scream your head off about how singers wrong for not doing a live action STAS or whatever, but i dont really care, as most people arent complaining about the donner details besides a minority of post crisis fanboys. the general audience dosent give a rats ass about post crisis or the donner movies. Not to mention the majority of superman fans liked the movie, as polls indicate.

It's not a bad film. However, it is a poorly written story. There's really no excitement to the film. It's rather dull and boring, IMO. Singer really hasn't made a film that resonates with the fans, and is one they feel strongly about enough to the point of seeing it multiple times, or even seeing it once. Again, this is clearly reflected in the box office. If the film were so great, WoM would have spread and people would have flocked to see it, over POTC 2.

As it stands, I've heard of and seen some theatres take down a print of SR to give an extra screen to POTC 2 to accomodate the fans because they want to see that film.

POTC 2 put all the elements together needed to make a great film, and it is reflecting at the box office, and will likely reflect with multiple viewing. SR had all the potential in the world, but didn't deliver the goods. This is Singer's fault and the fault of his writers. Their presentation was a poor representation of what people wanted to see in a Superman film.

The fact that Spiderman connected with the fans or LOTR is a strong indicator of a director who knows how to make a film that will bring the people out, and connect with the story. Singer didn't do that. He had all the potential ingredients, but was in over his head, and didn't really give us a film on the level of the ones I mentioned. Superman deserved more than Singer. He also gave us a film with Superman having a son, which has really turned many people off, but it's created a hole so deep that he may not be able to dig out of. We're basically stuck with Jason. This was a poor decision to bring into the mix. This film was supposed to be about Superman's Return, and instead it becomes the focus of Jason's Arrival.

[Ben Urich]

Their presentation was a poor representation of what people wanted to see in a Superman film.

That's the biggest problem right there.
I liked the movie (almost loved it), but it really didn't have a target audience. It just... was.

[Red Mask]

That's the biggest problem right there.
I liked the movie (almost loved it), but it really didn't have a target audience. It just... was.

Exactly. Superman has grown into a cultural icon. Everybody now has a different perception of him. This same problem could affect the Wonder Woman film, more so than with the comic sales.

[Ben Urich]

Exactly. Superman has grown into a cultural icon. Everybody now has a different perception of him. This same problem could affect the Wonder Woman film, more so than with the comic sales.

I think the biggest problem with Wonder Woman is that there's not a woman alive out there who can play her convincingly. :o

[Lestat74]

If you ask me, the reasons both SR and BB didnt deliver lie solely on WB wanting to please the fans, who asked for darker, mature versions of the characters.

And when you ask for that, you lose potential audiences. And before some of you whine and scream that somehow appealing to audiences means camp, just look Batman 89', Donners Superman films, Raimi's Spider-Man flicks, and the first two x-movies.

If WB actually tries to make these movies for audiences and for fans too, then maybe supes and bats will be the hit movies they're supposed to be

I totally agree. I for one am thrilled that we didn't get campy versions of Batman and Superman, both Batman Begins and Superman Returns are reverent of their legacies. I'm thrilled with the darker, more adult take. But if we fanboys didn't scream bloody murder when the JJ ABrams/McG script was leaked, it would have got the green light ( Remember that?? Where Krypton didn't blow up, Jor-El was evil, Lex was Kryptonian, and Superman had a half brother? Oh, and the whole "Chosen One" prophecy? This movie was THAT close to getting made, if not for the internet fervor.) I am thrilled to death that we got the movie we got, and not that. I don't care if it made less money than the McG version would have. The only substantial change to the Superman mythos in SR is Jason, and since Lois and Clark are married in the comics it was gonna happen sooner or later. I'm sure the sequels will be more kid friendly. Let's just hope they don't dumb it down too.

[CConn]

I think the biggest problem with Wonder Woman is that there's not a woman alive out there who can play her convincingly. :oYes there is. :o

Jennifer Connelly's just too old. :(

[Ben Urich]

Yes there is. :o

Jennifer Connelly's just too old. :(

Let's make a time machine. :(

[chosen1]

the reason why these movies like potc and FF are doing so well is because of the Kids. they are in no way as good as BB or SR it's just movies that families go see and movies that boyfriend and girlfriend go see. Everytime i ask a client where i work a parent w/ children did they see batman begins. 90% of the time it is a no but yes to FF and Potc. Its just #'s not movie quality.

[The Batman]

but...superman is supposed to appeal to kids...and if you think otherwise, you're deluding yourself.

BTAS proved that a mature take on Batman can be popular with kids as well.

[batlovescatDC]

Exactly... thank you. Batman Begins grossed much more on DVD than in theatres.

[dpm07]

but...superman is supposed to appeal to kids...and if you think otherwise, you're deluding yourself.

BTAS proved that a mature take on Batman can be popular with kids as well.

The DCAU proved a mature take can work. However, this was a poorly written story with regard to Superman Returns. Hence, it is not connecting with the fans, and they are not going out to see it. It's not the audience's fault. It's Singer and his whack pack of Harris and Daugherty who had a great concept, but a poor story.

If you think otherwise, you're just deluding yourself. However, you can probably be happy in the sense that we'll likely get a sequel and it will be just as poor from Singer again.

[WarBlade]

However, this was a poorly written story with regard to Superman Returns. Hence, it is not connecting with the fans, and they are not going out to see it.
Every post you make talks about the fans. :confused: From what I've seen the fans saw the movie and not many others bothered, so frankly all this theorizing about how the film failed financially because Singer made something that the fans in general might have had a hard time accepting is frankly quite laughable.

Take the hint here. The general non-Superman fan movie-going public in 2007 is not really that interested in going to see a Superman film. :rolleyes:

[StorminNorman]

[FONT=Arial]POTC 2 put all the elements together needed to make a great film, and it is reflecting at the box office, and will likely reflect with multiple viewing.

POTC 2 isn't half the film that Superman Returns is. :down

[dpm07]

POTC 2 isn't half the film that Superman Returns is. :down

Actually, that's just your opinion that POTC 2 isn't half the film SR is. You need to clarify that or you really don't come off as anything other than posturing that your opinion is absolute. By doing so, you lose all credibility in your statement.

[Galactical]

I wouldn't say the people are the problem either. The people just aren't interested. For the most part they don't even get far enough in the door to think things like "sub par film" "relying heavily on nostalgia" that "uses tasteless shock value". What most will be thinking is, "A Superman film? Meh. What else is on?"

But it's SUPERMAN. It's why smallville's a hit and he's an extremely popular superhero around the world. i don't understand how anyone would not want to see something anything about superman unless there's poor wom on the flick.

Conspiracy theory now? I think if there was ever a conspiracy theory it was probably here on the Hype with fans trying to convince the rest of us that Superman Returns was going to be a huge hit or something. :D

You're telling me? it's politics nowadays. agenda driven propaganda, flamewars, statistics, the spin makes you dizzy, all this stuff getting thrown around to play movie politics. it's something i see every day. i sometimes wonder if there are really some who have stock in these film's success or if agents from the studios are amongst us. i'm just some dorky guy with a laptop, but hey nobody knows that for real. Maybe I'm under the employ of fox studios. I vaguely remember that being reported on the news, that studios pay people to hype their films online. It makes me sick.

Personally, I figured it would be a moderate success over in the States and a wet fish everywhere else. I'm actually surprised that every report I've read of projectionists and managers around the world is of poor turnout. From what I can gather it's looking more like a wet fish with a led sinker in it's mouth everywhere.

All this is not too surprising for me. i didn't walk away think i saw a box office smash, but knew the potential was there because it's a superman film after all these years, rabid fans would gobble it up. But i didn't factor in the popular cartoons and smallvile show maybe already providing enough supes so that if this film was anything but excellent it wasn't going to be as big a quencher for them as some of the best stuff we've seen from supes in other incarnations. It's not like the star wars prequels which although really poorly written movies, still made a ridiculous profit at the bo most likely because they were some new star wars movies and were marketed very well. I guess people have become wiser? have seen better non-stalker superman anyway? WB's really twisting around trying to find an answer to why this movie is sinking and imo it's not because there's too much supes, it's because this movie forgot supes is supposed to be light fun, not the passion of the superman and superboy.

:marv::marv::marv::marv:

[MalroyChick11]

Spider-Man is so popular because ppl can relate to him and like him or not a vast majority of the worldwide public wanted to see Tom Welling end his run on Smallville (fact: SV brings in profits to Warner what SR cost to make - over 200 million dollars in tv, dvd and merchandise sales and is the most sold and watched Warner Bros. tv show worldwide) and gratuate to the big screen because they CAN relate to his portrayal of the character. He made people believe again in Superman (and again whether some ppl want to admit it or not, it's thanks to the show and his portrayal that Warner greenlit a new Superman movie) and that's why alot of ppl wanted to see Supes soar once again.
This movie as good as it is, it's still a huge disapointment to ppl who wanted something new and original. And hopefully after this great homage to the Donner film, in a few years Warner will give us a new movie with something new and with a Superman ppl can relate to.


Okay, I might be completely wrong, but I wanted to put a thought in:

I think Spider-Man is only loved because he has a cool costume and fun powers.

There. I said it.

I mean, I loved the whole 'Superman growing up on a farm and ending up in Metropolis' thing. Plus Lois and Clark are my all-time favorite couple. With Spidey....he's a geek with a crush on some hot chick who got bit by a spider. It's the X-Men I can relate to; not Spider-Man. I just wish I had the webs and the tall buildings.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Kane]Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.[/B]

If SR does indeed prove unprofitable, there will likely be no sequels (given the massive budget it requires).

.

If anyone is curious as to why Superman Returns is doing so poorley, it's very simple. Opening July 4th weekend. A HUGE mistake by WB. Idiots, who the hell wants to go to the movies on the 4th of July? Yes a lot of people, but there are also just as many if not MORE people going away for that weekend. Plus a Wed premiere opening, when as a movie EVER opened to a HUGE 3 day premiere when it's on a wed?

Not to mention that the following week POTC opens right after it, another huge mistake by WB. They screwed SR over themselves.

It should have opened at least a week earlier if not two weeks AFTER POTC.

[WarBlade]

If anyone is curious as to why Superman Returns is doing so poorley, it's very simple. Opening July 4th weekend.
A theory which self-destructs under the observation that this American event date has zero bearing on all of the other markets that are reporting low attendance at Superman screenings.

[Octoberist]

I think that Batman Begins and Superman Returns can't be compared box office-wise. Let's leave Spider-Man out of my arguement since NOTHING IN THE WORLD can touch that.

Batman Begins was a moderate sucess box office wise. And the DVD sales were very strong, and actually pulled in more people into its fanbase. Batman Begins also had to restart the franchise, a hard task to do since the last terrible movie came out 8 years before.

And to be fair, we can't really judge Superman Return's Box office right now (it's not done yet) but when compared to Pirates 2, it's dissapointing.


The difference between batman begins and Superman Returns is the critical response. While Batman didn't break records, it's hailed as a groundbreaking movie in this genre. It has a universal appeal, both comic and causual fans alike.

Superman Returns got good/decent reviews but from what I'm feeling right now, it's almost like a HULK backlash from the fans. And because it's not doing 'SUPER' at the box office, people who didn't like the movie had a field day. Remember, the internet CAN be an arena where people can very pesimestic....

So it's not the end of DC. Superman just underperformed for no reason. The last movie came out almost 20 years ago. I just think the appeal of Superman is lacking, and Singer in my honest opinion didn't do enough to change people's minds. I liked Superman Returns, don't get me wrong, but it could of been better. It felt unfocused. It had good ideas, but also had a bunch of bad ideas, which probably led to its lukewarm box office fate.

[DarKush]

Looking over the posts, I agree with a lot of what dpm07 is saying.

I loved the Donner films, but I don't think that Singer should've tried to do a continuation. Outside of using the John Williams score, I think the film would've done better to reboot the franchise. Which is essentially what Nolan did with Batman Begins.

(Of course, I wish the Danny Elfman score had been kept for BB as well, even though it might not fit with the new sensibilities of the Nolan film. But I really loved that score.)

I think Singer attempted to take some chances and give Superman relevance for contemporary audiences, but his gambles didn't quite pay off. By closely emulating 20 year old films, Singer was already giving himself an extra burden in contemporizing the Superman story.

The Jason angle was intriguing, but could easily become an albatross if it is not handled correctly in other films. And I doubt that arc has been fully thought out like it should've been if you're going to radically alter the Superman story that way.

And the idea of Supes having a kid turned off as many people as it probably interested. The stalker thing definitely turned people off.

The emulation itself was half-done. If Superman promised to never leave Earth in Supes 2, then why did he go away for 5 years? Does Lois now remember her rendezvous with Clark/Superman in the Fortress from Superman 2? Why is Lex still obssessed with land-couldn't he adapt or come up with a new scheme in 5 years time? There was little natural progression for the Lex character, outside of getting a group of henchmen this time instead of just Otis and Miss Tessmacher.

All of the religious stuff should've been toned down as well. Superman has god-like powers, but he isn't a god. He is an alien. I think Smallville gets that better in how they portray Clark's isolation from humanity.

The casting itself was also largely weak. I didn't really care about any of these characters like I did for Blade/Whistler, Peter/MJ/Osbornes, Bruce Wayne, X-Men/Magneto, or even the FF.

Routh isn't Reeve, and it was a mistake to try to channel him. Singer should've left Routh to do his own take on Clark/Supes. However, Bosworth's tepid take on Lois left me wanting to see Margot Kidder.

SR is not a box office failure. It will make its money back, and probably do well in DVD sales. But I think the flat story doesn't warrant that many repeat viewings.

By grounding it in 'realism', there isn't a lot of Superman being super in the film for my tastes. Very little, outside of the plane rescue, that got my blood pumping.

What I hope is that SR makes enough money to warrant a sequel, but not so much that Singer won't be forced to reconsider the mistakes in the first movie and really knock it out of the park the next time.

[ultimatefan]

I will never agree that a reboot was the right idea for a new Superman movie, no matter what SR makes.

What I think is the studio won´t be willing to spend 200m on a new superhero movie so soon, which is a big part of why SR is being called a disappointment. I think you can make a Wonder Woman movie on a Batman Begins budget and a Flash movie for less, so I don´t think the current projects are in danger. My fear is more of a general perception that the superhero wave may be starting to fade.

[thedarks0ldier]

My fear is more of a general perception that the superhero wave may be starting to fade.
As the Batman sequals and Superman sequals come out, more and more people will come to watch. X-Men was a franchise that only went up (in terms of money) and hopefully the DC franchises do the same. I hope their numbers are also directly realtaed to their quality also.

[Lestat74]

I will never agree that a reboot was the right idea for a new Superman movie, no matter what SR makes.

What I think is the studio won´t be willing to spend 200m on a new superhero movie so soon, which is a big part of why SR is being called a disappointment. I think you can make a Wonder Woman movie on a Batman Begins budget and a Flash movie for less, so I don´t think the current projects are in danger. My fear is more of a general perception that the superhero wave may be starting to fade.

Even if Superman had made Pirates style numbers, I doubt that Warners would give $150 mil. budgets to Flash or Wonder Woman. Wondy is a female character and they'll worry that it'll go the way of Catwoman, Aeon Flux and Elektra....$80 mil budget tops. And Flash, the same....he's not really known to the non comic audience at all. The only Flash they know is Flash Gordon because there was a movie. My big worry is that because of SR underperforming, they'll start to micro-manage and Joss Whedon and David Goyer will get fed up and walk out on the whole thing.

[Red Mask]

I will never agree that a reboot was the right idea for a new Superman movie, no matter what SR makes.

What I think is the studio won´t be willing to spend 200m on a new superhero movie so soon, which is a big part of why SR is being called a disappointment. I think you can make a Wonder Woman movie on a Batman Begins budget and a Flash movie for less, so I don´t think the current projects are in danger. My fear is more of a general perception that the superhero wave may be starting to fade.

Not yet. Keep the concepts and villains unique to each title, and it'll draw the audience. Look at the action movies. If it isn't terrorists it's somebody else.

[warpdrive]

I think they will improve, people want to make money what better way to do it by getting all of the comic fanatics on your side. I include myself in this

[Philly Phanboy]

According to this article (http://www.tmz.com/2006/07/10/exclusive-super-200-million-man-or-else/), Superman might not even get another movie if it doesn't make the studio $200 million. :eek:

[Ben Urich]

Dammit. :(

[Dr. Fate]

Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.

If SR does indeed prove unprofitable, there will likely be no sequels (given the massive budget it requires).

This may likely also convince WB to NOT continue the DC superhero movies and NOT to take chances on the lesser known heroes when Superman proved to be unpopular.

Flash, Wonder Woman, Shazam, Green Lantern etc...Big budget DC Superhero films like these likely wont happen if Superman proves unprofitable.

Even though Batman Begins will be the only ones to continue, its unlikely we'll see other DC Superheroes step up into these big budget films if Superman is a failure.......

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future.

Discuss.
You know, as much as I like Superman and Batman, it angers and disheartens me that all these years later Warner Brothers is still relying on them to draw audiences to movies instead of letting their siblings - Wonder Woman, Capt. Marvel, Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, etc. - have a shot. That whole "Superman & Batman are the icons" thing only can only go so far.

[WarBlade]

According to this article (http://www.tmz.com/2006/07/10/exclusive-super-200-million-man-or-else/), Superman might not even get another movie if it doesn't make the studio $200 million. :eek:
Actually according to that article Superman might not get another movie if the north American gross does not exceed $200 million. That's quite a different story by hundreds of millions of dollars.

[SpiderHulkThing]

Superman Returns was a lot better than I expected. I really hope to see more Superman films and of course, movies like Flash, Green Lantern etc.

[warpdrive]

I hope it make more money

[Infamy]

You know, as much as I like Superman and Batman, it angers and disheartens me that all these years later Warner Brothers is still relying on them to draw audiences to movies instead of letting their siblings - Wonder Woman, Capt. Marvel, Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, etc. - have a shot. That whole "Superman & Batman are the icons" thing only can only go so far.

Ive always said a Green Lantern film/trilogy done correct would be the be all and end all of comic book films/trilogys.

It has everything, the storyline that settings, itd be a SciFi Epic, itd be the new star wars!

[WarBlade]

My latest schedule came through today. Third week and we will be down to one Superman show per day shoehorned into a 12:15 mid day slot. That's pathetic. Catwoman had more staying power than that. :eek:

[Chris Wallace]

WB/DC has ALWAYS had a sense of trepidation when it comes to their non-Super/non-Bat characters. Every big TV project that they've greenlit in the last 10 years or so is pretty much Batman and/or Superman related. Smallville, Justice League, Batman Beyond, Birds Of Prey, even Teen Titans has Robin. Then there's the JLA pilot that never saw the light of day except on bootleg, the Aquaman series that got 86'ed, (which, mind you, was intended to be a spinoff of Smallville) the phenomenal flops that were Swamp Thing & Steel. And even the short-lived Flash series tried to cash in on Batman's success. WB has little faith in their characters & it does seem to be diminishing.

[boywonder13]

It all really depends on how well the Dc movies comnig out this decade fair.

Batman Begins 2/3 will make a lot.
Superman Returns sequel - it will do ok, if not better than the first.

Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, The Flash, all have huge potentinal (maybe not Wonder Woman)...

You're right Chris Wallace, WB is Batman/Superman centric!!

[Chris Wallace]

And Has Been For A While Now.

[Chris Wallace]

I mean, think about it. They had a tremendously bad year in '97, & they don't come back out of the gate until 2005. While Marvel's getting things moving forward across the board, w/first, second AND third-string heroes, WB/DC is in limbo. Eight years they could've made progress with Wonder Woman, Flash or a number of other properties but nothing happened. And let's be real about it; they were scared. Afraid to take a chance w/a lesser known character. If Blade can be a hit, why can't-I can't think of a DC parallel but you get my point.

[GL's Light]

I mean, think about it. They had a tremendously bad year in '97, & they don't come back out of the gate until 2005. While Marvel's getting things moving forward across the board, w/first, second AND third-string heroes, WB/DC is in limbo. Eight years they could've made progress with Wonder Woman, Flash or a number of other properties but nothing happened. And let's be real about it; they were scared. Afraid to take a chance w/a lesser known character. If Blade can be a hit, why can't-I can't think of a DC parallel but you get my point.
Actually, they came back out of the gate in 2004 with Catwoman - most unfortunate. I wish we could erase that one.

DC being part of Time Warner has its pros and cons. The biggest pro is that DC has a huge, powerful corporate empire cushioning it from any fiscal downfalls. If a DC film is a costly failure, Time Warner can take the punch.

Marvel, on the other hand, is in a more precarious financial position - as their fiscal rollercoaster ride over the last couple of decades demonstrates. Although they've been in much better financial shape lately, their fortunes could change quite quickly. With Marvel getting involved in self-financing their own films, they're taking on much more risk. If they have just a couple of expensive flops it could do serious damage to their financial health.

The disadvantage of being part of TW for DC is that they're entirely dependent on TW to greenlight film and television adaptations, and whereas Marvel's business strategy is heavily focussed on getting Marvel films made (either under license to various studios or through their self-financed slate), DC is just one part of TW's massive empire.

As far as TW is concerned, they don't need to make that many superhero films - they'll greenlight them at their leisure to fit into their overall slate of films. That's very frustrating for DC fans - and we can make the case that TW is leaving a lot of potentially lucrative films sitting on the shelf - but TW will likely continue to see DC as just one cog in their gargantuan machine.

[Chris Wallace]

I don't count Catwoman since it wasn't Selina Kyle & had no ties to the comic.

[Cdawg751]

Yeah Lets Try To Forget That Film Even Happened

[Chris Wallace]

Even if it was good I still wouldn't count it.