The Official Captain America Box Office Thread! - Part 2

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is 360503

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is 335443

[Spider-Fan]

Or a matter of FACT.


DC character design, names, mythos, etc., are archaic and outdated. In some cases downright silly, e.g., colour-coded emotion power rings from space.

Once again...that's a great opinion. I am more of a Marvel guy, too. But, that doesn't make Marvel > DC a fact. It's an opinion, no matter how much you want it to be fact. That's simply not the case, and please don't get DC fans riled up because you can't distinguish between a fact and opinion.

[Axl Van Sixx]

BUMP:

I've always had a soft spot for DC even though I like Marvel too. Sure, DC has Superman and Batman, but the other members of the Justice League are pretty cool too.

Green Lantern had incredible potential - it really could have been the Star Wars of superhero movies if it had been treated right. But they totally botched it in the execution. Martin Campbell was totally unsuited to this kind of SFX-heavy material, Blake Lively was anything but, and Ryan Reynolds, although entertaining and a good actor, is not Hal Jordan. Instead of embracing the unique cosmic nature of GL's stories to establish an epic sci-fi universe, the producers of the movie decided to play it safe and stuck to the standard superhero formula. Ironically, their desire to play it safe prevented GL from ever establishing an identity of its own, resulting in an absolutely generic superhero flick.

There is an argument to be made that DC's superheroes are harder to adapt to the big screen, but I think the problem is less DC's stable of heroes and more a lack of imagination. There are all kinds of ways to create interesting DC films, and part of the way you do that is by embracing each hero's unique, individual elements. You could do a Wonder Woman movie that revels in Greek mythology, or a Hawkman movie in the Egyptian; you could do a Martian Manhunter space opera; or a lighthearted Flash movie that uses his kooky, off-the-wall villains as an advantage, and maybe include a "passing-of-the-torch" element between Flashes - Jay Garrick, Barry Allen, and/or Wally West - which is something that hasn't really been shown in superhero movies before. That David Goyer script on Green Arrow - Escape from Supermax - also sounded like a really cool, original idea.

I really do think the problem is that now, more than ever, the big Hollywood studios are practically allergic to original ideas. Every wannabe blockbuster with a $150 million+ budget is a massive investment and studios naturally want to minimize their risk. Add to this the increasing corporatization of the studio system, the growing emphasis on opening weekend grosses...and the notion that the CEO of a studio like Warner Bros. would dare take a chance on an idea like any of the above is drastically diminished.

The difference with Marvel is clearly the fact that they produce their own films. The people who are in control of planning these things love what they do, they love the characters and they geek out just as much as us at the notion of bringing their favourite superheroes to life. That's the difference - passion. I'm fairly certain that when Jeff Robinov or whoever at Warner Bros. was first pitched Green Lantern, their initial reaction was almost certainly, "What's a green lantern?"

All these summer movies are mass-marketed products, but with Marvel's films you really feel the love the filmmakers bring to their products. Warner executives, on the other hand, have been notorious for their ill-advised meddling in properties they don't understand. This was most obvious in the 90s, with Batman's descent into Joel Schumacher neon hell and Superman's multiple miscarriages. With Chris Nolan, somehow they got it right. Maybe for a while they were adopting a strategy of leaving the directors alone, but Bryan Singer showed with Superman Returns that that's not always a good strategy either if the director has horrible ideas of his own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefchirpa http://forums.superherohype.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=21449611#post21449611)
Are you sure? Marvel's strength is not about the World's Finest, Trinity or the Big 5 club. It's more or less about equal opportunity for the little guys. There's a reason why suddenly Blade comes up as a star or Iron Man rockets from the B-team to a headliner. I'm sure Marvel will do something to make people interested to see the other characters.

I'm going to do a total 180 here because I think you're probably right. You can use any idea for a movie and make it work if you're creative enough. Now, I still maintain a movie with the lower-tier Marvel heroes is likely to be not much better than the Blade series, but you never know. I will maintain an open mind.

[Docker2.0]

Darn Threadbots!! :argh:

[Shadowlord X]

Once again...that's a great opinion. I am more of a Marvel guy, too. But, that doesn't make Marvel > DC a fact. It's an opinion, no matter how much you want it to be fact. That's simply not the case, and please don't get DC fans riled up because you can't distinguish between a fact and opinion.


I'm going to end this for the sake of peace, but if you cannot tell the difference between what is silly and what is not then I cannot help you.
I suppose you would argue that teletubbies being intellectually stimulating is a matter of opinion too?

[Shadowlord X]

BUMP:

I've always had a soft spot for DC even though I like Marvel too. Sure, DC has Superman and Batman, but the other members of the Justice League are pretty cool too.

Green Lantern had incredible potential - it really could have been the Star Wars of superhero movies if it had been treated right. But they totally botched it in the execution. Martin Campbell was totally unsuited to this kind of SFX-heavy material, Blake Lively was anything but, and Ryan Reynolds, although entertaining and a good actor, is not Hal Jordan. Instead of embracing the unique cosmic nature of GL's stories to establish an epic sci-fi universe, the producers of the movie decided to play it safe and stuck to the standard superhero formula. Ironically, their desire to play it safe prevented GL from ever establishing an identity of its own, resulting in an absolutely generic superhero flick.

There is an argument to be made that DC's superheroes are harder to adapt to the big screen, but I think the problem is less DC's stable of heroes and more a lack of imagination. There are all kinds of ways to create interesting DC films, and part of the way you do that is by embracing each hero's unique, individual elements. You could do a Wonder Woman movie that revels in Greek mythology, or a Hawkman movie in the Egyptian; you could do a Martian Manhunter space opera; or a lighthearted Flash movie that uses his kooky, off-the-wall villains as an advantage, and maybe include a "passing-of-the-torch" element between Flashes - Jay Garrick, Barry Allen, and/or Wally West - which is something that hasn't really been shown in superhero movies before. That David Goyer script on Green Arrow - Escape from Supermax - also sounded like a really cool, original idea.

I really do think the problem is that now, more than ever, the big Hollywood studios are practically allergic to original ideas. Every wannabe blockbuster with a $150 million+ budget is a massive investment and studios naturally want to minimize their risk. Add to this the increasing corporatization of the studio system, the growing emphasis on opening weekend grosses...and the notion that the CEO of a studio like Warner Bros. would dare take a chance on an idea like any of the above is drastically diminished.

The difference with Marvel is clearly the fact that they produce their own films. The people who are in control of planning these things love what they do, they love the characters and they geek out just as much as us at the notion of bringing their favourite superheroes to life. That's the difference - passion. I'm fairly certain that when Jeff Robinov or whoever at Warner Bros. was first pitched Green Lantern, their initial reaction was almost certainly, "What's a green lantern?"

All these summer movies are mass-marketed products, but with Marvel's films you really feel the love the filmmakers bring to their products. Warner executives, on the other hand, have been notorious for their ill-advised meddling in properties they don't understand. This was most obvious in the 90s, with Batman's descent into Joel Schumacher neon hell and Superman's multiple miscarriages. With Chris Nolan, somehow they got it right. Maybe for a while they were adopting a strategy of leaving the directors alone, but Bryan Singer showed with Superman Returns that that's not always a good strategy either if the director has horrible ideas of his own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefchirpa http://forums.superherohype.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=21449611#post21449611)
Are you sure? Marvel's strength is not about the World's Finest, Trinity or the Big 5 club. It's more or less about equal opportunity for the little guys. There's a reason why suddenly Blade comes up as a star or Iron Man rockets from the B-team to a headliner. I'm sure Marvel will do something to make people interested to see the other characters.

I'm going to do a total 180 here because I think you're probably right. You can use any idea for a movie and make it work if you're creative enough. Now, I still maintain a movie with the lower-tier Marvel heroes is likely to be not much better than the Blade series, but you never know. I will maintain an open mind.


This is a very well written post. I agree with some points and not with others.

The most significant post and one that I agree with is that the strength and success of MARVEL STUDIOS' movies stems from the PASSION of the creative poeple behind the projects. This is evident in every film and was blatantly absent in gl.

However there is a difference in the creation of these characters at the base level, i.e., at the comicbook level, long before they get to movies. MARVEL makes their characters more human, with flaws that make them more interesting and relatable. They often have 'a thing' around which their entire mythos is based upon, e.g., THOR's arrogance and lack of humility and subsequent humanisation, NIGHTCRAWLER's religious nature vs his demonic appearance. Thus this gives them a strong foundation to build solid movies upon. DC's characters are more old school and archaic and usually lack 'a thing'; Flash just gets powers and now has superspeed, Hal Jordan gets a ring because he's brave and now he's a demigod who can create anything. Over the years this has improved in the comics but fo the most part in updating their characters or transferring them to the big screen they have to force something of substance into the character. They tried to do this with gl with the whole 'ability to overcome fear rather than fearless' making Hal jordan a better gl against Parallax. But because it's forced into these characters rather than being inherently part of them from their very creation it will tend to fail, as it did in gl.

Thus I think the statement that most DC characters are more difficult to adapt to the live action big screen is true. They don't have the substance inherent in them to build strong scripts with ineteresting character arcs around. The exception of course is BATMAN who is their most MARVEL-like character.

Can you make entertaining movies with those characters. Probably. If you try really hard. However box-office success is not dependent on quality alone. Relatability and Mass Market Appeal are what translate into the BO grosses.

[KangConquers]

Id argue that superman has a "thing" being the alone on this world and being one of the last of his kind.

[Spider-Fan]

I'm going to end this for the sake of peace, but if you cannot tell the difference between what is silly and what is not then I cannot help you.
I suppose you would argue that teletubbies being intellectually stimulating is a matter of opinion too?

Yes, because Superman is as childish a concept as the friggin teletubbies :whatever:

Seriously, go troll somewhere else...please.

[Shadowlord X]

Id argue that superman has a "thing" being the alone on this world and being one of the last of his kind.

I would agree to some extent.

[Whiskey Tango]

BUMP:

I've always had a soft spot for DC even though I like Marvel too. Sure, DC has Superman and Batman, but the other members of the Justice League are pretty cool too.

Green Lantern had incredible potential - it really could have been the Star Wars of superhero movies if it had been treated right. But they totally botched it in the execution. Martin Campbell was totally unsuited to this kind of SFX-heavy material, Blake Lively was anything but, and Ryan Reynolds, although entertaining and a good actor, is not Hal Jordan. Instead of embracing the unique cosmic nature of GL's stories to establish an epic sci-fi universe, the producers of the movie decided to play it safe and stuck to the standard superhero formula. Ironically, their desire to play it safe prevented GL from ever establishing an identity of its own, resulting in an absolutely generic superhero flick.

There is an argument to be made that DC's superheroes are harder to adapt to the big screen, but I think the problem is less DC's stable of heroes and more a lack of imagination. There are all kinds of ways to create interesting DC films, and part of the way you do that is by embracing each hero's unique, individual elements. You could do a Wonder Woman movie that revels in Greek mythology, or a Hawkman movie in the Egyptian; you could do a Martian Manhunter space opera; or a lighthearted Flash movie that uses his kooky, off-the-wall villains as an advantage, and maybe include a "passing-of-the-torch" element between Flashes - Jay Garrick, Barry Allen, and/or Wally West - which is something that hasn't really been shown in superhero movies before. That David Goyer script on Green Arrow - Escape from Supermax - also sounded like a really cool, original idea.

I really do think the problem is that now, more than ever, the big Hollywood studios are practically allergic to original ideas. Every wannabe blockbuster with a $150 million+ budget is a massive investment and studios naturally want to minimize their risk. Add to this the increasing corporatization of the studio system, the growing emphasis on opening weekend grosses...and the notion that the CEO of a studio like Warner Bros. would dare take a chance on an idea like any of the above is drastically diminished.

The difference with Marvel is clearly the fact that they produce their own films. The people who are in control of planning these things love what they do, they love the characters and they geek out just as much as us at the notion of bringing their favourite superheroes to life. That's the difference - passion. I'm fairly certain that when Jeff Robinov or whoever at Warner Bros. was first pitched Green Lantern, their initial reaction was almost certainly, "What's a green lantern?"

All these summer movies are mass-marketed products, but with Marvel's films you really feel the love the filmmakers bring to their products. Warner executives, on the other hand, have been notorious for their ill-advised meddling in properties they don't understand. This was most obvious in the 90s, with Batman's descent into Joel Schumacher neon hell and Superman's multiple miscarriages. With Chris Nolan, somehow they got it right. Maybe for a while they were adopting a strategy of leaving the directors alone, but Bryan Singer showed with Superman Returns that that's not always a good strategy either if the director has horrible ideas of his own.

This post should be written up as a memo and stapled to the foreheads of everyone at WB.

[TheVileOne]

Looks like Cap has now officially crossed over the $350 million mark worldwide and currently stands at $352 million worldwide.

[Axl Van Sixx]

$350 million seems like a fairly solid success to me. Has anybody read anything on a potential Cap sequel yet? I think they hired a writer already, but we still have yet to hear an official announcement for Cap 2.

[Liam_H]

They had a writer working on the sequel back in April so that's not really any indication they're really moving forward.

[Whiskey Tango]

Looks like Cap has now officially crossed over the $350 million mark worldwide and currently stands at $352 million worldwide.

That's great but it really shouldn't have taken this long to wring out so little comparatively. I'm disappointed in you, Planet Earth.

[S.A.A.D.]

BUMP:

I've always had a soft spot for DC even though I like Marvel too. Sure, DC has Superman and Batman, but the other members of the Justice League are pretty cool too.

Green Lantern had incredible potential - it really could have been the Star Wars of superhero movies if it had been treated right. But they totally botched it in the execution. Martin Campbell was totally unsuited to this kind of SFX-heavy material, Blake Lively was anything but, and Ryan Reynolds, although entertaining and a good actor, is not Hal Jordan. Instead of embracing the unique cosmic nature of GL's stories to establish an epic sci-fi universe, the producers of the movie decided to play it safe and stuck to the standard superhero formula. Ironically, their desire to play it safe prevented GL from ever establishing an identity of its own, resulting in an absolutely generic superhero flick.

There is an argument to be made that DC's superheroes are harder to adapt to the big screen, but I think the problem is less DC's stable of heroes and more a lack of imagination. There are all kinds of ways to create interesting DC films, and part of the way you do that is by embracing each hero's unique, individual elements. You could do a Wonder Woman movie that revels in Greek mythology, or a Hawkman movie in the Egyptian; you could do a Martian Manhunter space opera; or a lighthearted Flash movie that uses his kooky, off-the-wall villains as an advantage, and maybe include a "passing-of-the-torch" element between Flashes - Jay Garrick, Barry Allen, and/or Wally West - which is something that hasn't really been shown in superhero movies before. That David Goyer script on Green Arrow - Escape from Supermax - also sounded like a really cool, original idea.

I really do think the problem is that now, more than ever, the big Hollywood studios are practically allergic to original ideas. Every wannabe blockbuster with a $150 million+ budget is a massive investment and studios naturally want to minimize their risk. Add to this the increasing corporatization of the studio system, the growing emphasis on opening weekend grosses...and the notion that the CEO of a studio like Warner Bros. would dare take a chance on an idea like any of the above is drastically diminished.

The difference with Marvel is clearly the fact that they produce their own films. The people who are in control of planning these things love what they do, they love the characters and they geek out just as much as us at the notion of bringing their favourite superheroes to life. That's the difference - passion. I'm fairly certain that when Jeff Robinov or whoever at Warner Bros. was first pitched Green Lantern, their initial reaction was almost certainly, "What's a green lantern?"

All these summer movies are mass-marketed products, but with Marvel's films you really feel the love the filmmakers bring to their products. Warner executives, on the other hand, have been notorious for their ill-advised meddling in properties they don't understand. This was most obvious in the 90s, with Batman's descent into Joel Schumacher neon hell and Superman's multiple miscarriages. With Chris Nolan, somehow they got it right. Maybe for a while they were adopting a strategy of leaving the directors alone, but Bryan Singer showed with Superman Returns that that's not always a good strategy either if the director has horrible ideas of his own.

You make it sound like the whole Green Lantern mythos was thrown out the window when it came to putting together the movie. I can soooooooo not take you seriously because of saying that the movie is absolutely bland, the truth is that the movie is somewhat bland, and lastly. Lastly you can't totally blame WB since the general audience is still "AFRAID" of movies that are different from the norm, if not too different. And if you keep expecting comic book movies to be exactly like the comics that they are based off of then you're going to be disappointed for the rest of your life just like some of the others. It's pretty damn obvious that there are parallels between the movie and the comic books that it is based off of. And just FYI, I think that the movie is flawed (in case you attack me).

Oh and as for Hollywood being allergic to original ideas? Give me a break...

[Axl Van Sixx]

You make it sound like the whole Green Lantern mythos was thrown out the window when it came to putting together the movie. I can soooooooo not take you seriously because of saying that the movie is absolutely bland, the truth is that the movie is somewhat bland, and lastly. Lastly you can't totally blame WB since the general audience is still "AFRAID" of movies that are different from the norm, if not too different. And if you keep expecting comic book movies to be exactly like the comics that they are based off of then you're going to be disappointed for the rest of your life just like some of the others. It's pretty damn obvious that there are parallels between the movie and the comic books that it is based off of. And just FYI, I think that the movie is flawed (in case you attack me).

Look, Green Lantern isn't HORRIBLE. But I guess given my preconceived notions about the film before I went in, it was bound to disappoint. The good moments were too few and far between. I never said these movies have to be exactly like the comics in every way; Thor was undoubtedly a stronger movie without Donald Blake, and I've never been one of those fanboys to agonize over no mechanical web-shooters for Spider-Man or no perma-white Joker. So to act like I'm some kind of ultra-purist is frankly comical (no pun intended).

I feel like you're constructing a strawman argument, but maybe I wasn't clear enough in my original criticisms of the movie. If anything, the most frustrating thing about Green Lantern was how close they came to getting it right. There were a few really good moments, but they were overshadowed by a whole lot of blah and questionable decisions (especially regarding choice of villains - Hector Hammond seemed like a "**** you" to GL's nerdy fanbase and Parallax proved once and for all that cloud villains never work). It's true that the movie could have been far worse, which it would have been if we'd gotten a Jack Black GL movie. But it's still nowhere near what it could have been, and I have as much right as anybody to express my opinion. It's mostly a few good actions scenes and that's it.

Oh and as for Hollywood being allergic to original ideas? Give me a break...

Excuse me for one second...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAha.

Of course you're right. That must be why every other movie released, especially during the summer, is a prequel, sequel, threequel, remake, reboot, "re-imagining", or an adaptation of a successful book, TV show, comic book, board game, video game, or toy.

It's really not that hard to figure out. With the colossal amounts of money required to make blockbuster films, studio execs don't want to take a chance on anything that isn't already "pre-sold" to the audience. Obviously Hollywood has always preferred pre-sold properties like book adaptations, but in recent years it's gotten truly depressing. It helps when the people who run studios are programmed to revere the bottom line above all else. Creativity, originality, artist merit - these qualities come a distant second to the overriding need for profit.

[Whiskey Tango]

I'm going to end this for the sake of peace, but if you cannot tell the difference between what is silly and what is not then I cannot help you.

He can tell the difference, he just recognizes that it's entirely subjective. You not liking the idea of Green Lantern doesn't make it a damn bit sillier than a guy with spider powers, a guy who stretches or a man who turns big and green when he's angry.

For the love of Christ knock off this stupid Marvel vs DC ********. It's posters like you who are part of the problem. You are the one who needs help. Grow up.

[KangConquers]

Is anyone as tired as I am of waiting for a Captain America 2 confirmation?

[marcvader]

Where we at numbers wise?

[rashad]

Paramount Pictures International (PPI) reported that Captain America seized $5.1m from 8,429 sites in 60 overseas markets as the running total climbed to $184.6m. In the second weekend in China the film added $3.4m from 7,000 venues for $12.1m.Domestic: $173,737,574 48.5%
+ Foreign: (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=captainamerica.htm) $184,600,000 51.5%
= Worldwide: $358,337,574
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=captainamerica.htm

Looks like it may cross $200M overseas afterall. With a Japan release still to come.

[Bryn]

I'm going to end this for the sake of peace, but if you cannot tell the difference between what is silly and what is not then I cannot help you.
I suppose you would argue that teletubbies being intellectually stimulating is a matter of opinion too?

Shadowlord, I happen to agree with your opinion on GL, and I was just being sarcastic with my POV. But, what might sound silly to us might be cool to someone else. Power rings are not my thing. But others don't care for shields that bounce around and take out a number of bad guys, always returning to its thrower. We suspend disbelief for the things that catch our imagination.

I apologize for offending any GL fans out there. Sarcasm and friendly ribbing doesn't come through too well on the internet.

[Bryn]

Amazing that CA did better overseas than here in the U.S. Perhaps more Americans are uncomfortable with American Patriotism than the rest of the world? LOL. I think, for the sequel, though, they should find a true fan of CA, and one with real vision for the character. I'd love to see a Roger Stern-quality story developed for the sequel.

[marcvader]

Looking forward to a sequel and hope to revisit wwii for portions of the film.

[KangConquers]

Amazing that CA did better overseas than here in the U.S. Perhaps more Americans are uncomfortable with American Patriotism than the rest of the world? LOL. I think, for the sequel, though, they should find a true fan of CA, and one with real vision for the character. I'd love to see a Roger Stern-quality story developed for the sequel.

It really has nothing to do with that. The International film market is just bigger than the domestic one; big blockbusters this summer averaged 60-70% of their total gross outside of the United States.

This was never going to do as little money overseas as people on this board thought it would. This was always going to make more money overseas than domestically, but the lack of overseas performance relative to other movies shows that foreigners (in particular, western Europe) have an anti-american bias.

TFA made more than Thor in several markets, but in Western Europe, Cap basically performed like Green Lantern. If I was part of the marketing team for Cap 2, I think I'd focus on growing the markets where Cap performed well. Cap 1 was sort of testing the waters to figure out where they could make money internationally. They should try to get The U.S.A. upto $200 M+, and get 30-50% bumps in South America and Asia, and Cap 2 will be fine.

[Spider-Fan]

He can tell the difference, he just recognizes that it's entirely subjective. You not liking the idea of Green Lantern doesn't make it a damn bit sillier than a guy with spider powers, a guy who stretches or a man who turns big and green when he's angry.

For the love of Christ knock off this stupid Marvel vs DC ********. It's posters like you who are part of the problem. You are the one who needs help. Grow up.

If this were facebook, I would like this post :up:

[hatebox]

This was always going to make more money overseas than domestically, but the lack of overseas performance relative to other movies shows that foreigners (in particular, western Europe) have an anti-american bias.

TFA made more than Thor in several markets, but in Western Europe, Cap basically performed like Green Lantern. .


Europe's generally pretty indifferent to comic book movies anyway - that Cap was the 4th of the summer didn't help.

[Shadowlord X]

Shadowlord, I happen to agree with your opinion on GL, and I was just being sarcastic with my POV. But, what might sound silly to us might be cool to someone else. Power rings are not my thing. But others don't care for shields that bounce around and take out a number of bad guys, always returning to its thrower. We suspend disbelief for the things that catch our imagination.

I apologize for offending any GL fans out there. Sarcasm and friendly ribbing doesn't come through too well on the internet.


Dude, I'm not trying to be offensive to people or create MARVEL vs DC tension. I am, however, a great supporter of facing reality. Had people faced reality, noone would ever thought that certain characters would do well as a live film.

But for me the topic is done; I'm perfectly happy leaving people to wallow in their ignorance

[marcvader]

Nice last line to end a discussion. You're a class act.

[Parker Wayne]

He can tell the difference, he just recognizes that it's entirely subjective. You not liking the idea of Green Lantern doesn't make it a damn bit sillier than a guy with spider powers, a guy who stretches or a man who turns big and green when he's angry.

For the love of Christ knock off this stupid Marvel vs DC ********. It's posters like you who are part of the problem. You are the one who needs help. Grow up.

This. :applaud

To whoever says GL can't work in movies is seriously lacking in imagination (keep in mind that this is my opinion). It could work, and the biggest problems weren't the character itself, but other things.

Captain America was a character that was created in the 40s (before the popular version of the Green Lantern) and is a successful character that's had a successful movie today. Saying that DC characters are outdated is ridiculous.

[Spider-Fan]

Dude, I'm not trying to be offensive to people or create MARVEL vs DC tension. I am, however, a great supporter of facing reality. Had people faced reality, noone would ever thought that certain characters would do well as a live film.

But for me the topic is done; I'm perfectly happy leaving people to wallow in their ignorance

Time for me to do work...

[Whiskey Tango]

He can blow it off and act innocent all he wants, all you have to do is scroll through his post history for a bit and the anti-DC pattern emerges. He's like that all the time.

[The Morningstar]

I honestly don't understand the Marvel vs DC thing. It's two corporations at the end of the day. Why show some kind of obsessive loyalty to them? They don't give a **** about us, apart from our $$$ £££.

Good comics are good comics, whether they are from DC, Marvel, Image or whatever.

[Spider-Fan]

He can blow it off and act innocent all he wants, all you have to do is scroll through his post history for a bit and the anti-DC pattern emerges. He's like that all the time.

Like I said with the whole Marvel/DC thing. People may think their opinion is right on which is better and that is fine, but disrespectful trolling is not something I tolerate and people who continue to do this, like Shadowlord up here, will be punished :up:

[TheVileOne]

It really has nothing to do with that. The International film market is just bigger than the domestic one; big blockbusters this summer averaged 60-70% of their total gross outside of the United States.

This was never going to do as little money overseas as people on this board thought it would. This was always going to make more money overseas than domestically, but the lack of overseas performance relative to other movies shows that foreigners (in particular, western Europe) have an anti-american bias.

TFA made more than Thor in several markets, but in Western Europe, Cap basically performed like Green Lantern. If I was part of the marketing team for Cap 2, I think I'd focus on growing the markets where Cap performed well. Cap 1 was sort of testing the waters to figure out where they could make money internationally. They should try to get The U.S.A. upto $200 M+, and get 30-50% bumps in South America and Asia, and Cap 2 will be fine.
I think Bryn does have a good point there. I think there is a lot to be said with how uncomfortable Hollywood is with American patriotism and characters like Captain America.

THE FIRST AVENGER subtitle is proof of that. It was unnecessary and quite frankly doesn't really even make any sense. Captain America isn't really THE FIRST AVENGER, it was sort of a tacky title.

Even Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes writer/producer Josh Fine talked about doing a focus group for the Avengers cartoon and a British kid said he didn't like Captain America because the kid said he "hates America." So that went into part of why Iron Man was the leader and more featured character over Captain America in the cartoon.

There was a lot going against Cap this summer as well. I think if they do a Cap sequel, the campaign needs to be more sure of itself and stop worrying about the patriotic aspect. And don't be afraid to use Memorial Day weekend/4th of July weekend, I mean why wouldn't you want the man who wears the American flag released on on weekends like that? I don't get why Michael Bay of all people gets that spot and for some reason his military infomercials are fine and he makes gajillions but people seem clueless and scared to their gills over how to deal with Captain America. Something isn't working with this formula to me.

[Liam_H]

Transformers gets the spot because its proven to rake it in during that time frame, which it did once again. No reason to mess with that.

[Spider-Fan]

I think Bryn does have a good point there. I think there is a lot to be said with how uncomfortable Hollywood is with American patriotism and characters like Captain America.

THE FIRST AVENGER subtitle is proof of that. It was unnecessary and quite frankly doesn't really even make any sense. Captain America isn't really THE FIRST AVENGER, it was sort of a tacky title.

Even Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes writer/producer Josh Fine talked about doing a focus group for the Avengers cartoon and a British kid said he didn't like Captain America because the kid said he "hates America." So that went into part of why Iron Man was the leader and more featured character over Captain America in the cartoon.

There was a lot going against Cap this summer as well. I think if they do a Cap sequel, the campaign needs to be more sure of itself and stop worrying about the patriotic aspect. And don't be afraid to use Memorial Day weekend/4th of July weekend, I mean why wouldn't you want the man who wears the American flag released on on weekends like that? I don't get why Michael Bay of all people gets that spot and for some reason his military infomercials are fine and he makes gajillions but people seem clueless and scared to their gills over how to deal with Captain America. Something isn't working with this formula to me.

Tranformers made a ton of bank, so Paramount was likely right to put that in the July 4th spot over Cap. It was more of a guaranteed money maker.

[Marvel]

Saw it again today for the last time in regular theatres. It's still playing near me. Kind of sad but it's the perfect way to spend the last day of summer. The summer of Marvel is officially over and what a great three picture ride we all enjoyed.

[BigThor]

THE FIRST AVENGER subtitle is proof of that. It was unnecessary and quite frankly doesn't really even make any sense. Captain America isn't really THE FIRST AVENGER, it was sort of a tacky title.

Yeah, I've always wondered why they call Cap the First Avenger since Thor was alive centuries before Cap was even thought of.

Even Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes writer/producer Josh Fine talked about doing a focus group for the Avengers cartoon and a British kid said he didn't like Captain America because the kid said he "hates America." So that went into part of why Iron Man was the leader and more featured character over Captain America in the cartoon.

Actually once came became an Avengers member in A:EMH, Cap, Iron Man, and Thor were pretty much equally featured (Cap and Iron Man a bit more).

He also had his fair share of leadership moments in the episode that made it seem like he was more of the leader than Iron Man.

[Bryn]

Tranformers made a ton of bank, so Paramount was likely right to put that in the July 4th spot over Cap. It was more of a guaranteed money maker.

That's right. It's all about money, really. And, as much as I suspect Hollywood is uncomfortable with American patriotism, I think if they focus grouped it and found that tons of people were tracking with it, they'd play to it. We saw a little of that besides: the whole "On July 22nd Heroes are Made In America" was playing to a domestic patriotic vibe. And I loved it. But it made them look a bit foolish after they spent a year of Joe Johnston and others downplaying the patriotism and saying Cap wasn't going to be a flag-waver. No, just a flag wearer! LOL.

But in the end, everything is about money. Now they know they have a base for Cap movies. Avengers might expand that. They'll schedule a sequel.

[KangConquers]

Soo...any updated charts? Cap should've crossed or should be crossing 190 M foreign by Monday. Can't wait for it to hit $200 M foreign!

[rashad]

soo...any updated charts? Cap should've crossed or should be crossing 190 m foreign by monday. Can't wait for it to hit $200 m foreign!

184,177,428

[DeGenerate10]

Any chance it passes Thor?

[BigThor]

Any chance it passes Thor?

None whatsoever

[Liam_H]

Certainly not passing WW or even domestic but essentially close enough in the latter.

[TheVileOne]

Well, the differences between the domestic gross are about the same or negligible really. I think arguably more people saw Cap, but they just didn't see it in 3D.

[marcvader]

How much more do you guys think Cap would've made had it been released in May?

[Liam_H]

You should specify when in May and if whether it replaces any of the big ones. If it had Thor's slot probably similar amount or maybe a bit more. But if it went up against Pirates or Hangover it would've taken a good hit.

[Parker Wayne]

I think it would've made much more domestically because in its second week it's biggest competition would've been Priest, not Cowboys and Aliens or Smurfs.

[marcvader]

You should specify when in May and if whether it replaces any of the big ones. If it had Thor's slot probably similar amount or maybe a bit more. But if it went up against Pirates or Hangover it would've taken a good hit.

So Marvel would release two movies in the same month? Obviously I meant in place of Thor. I'd guess it would've of benefited from being the first comicbook movie. That alone I think would have given it an advantage.

[Liam_H]

But even if it went in place of Thor it would've had to deal with Fast Five, which Thor also lost business to. So I think in the end it would've done a little better than Thor's $181 million maybe even $200 million but not much more.

[marcvader]

Hey, 20 mil is a sizable increase in my book.

[TheVileOne]

Cap wouldn't have been able to make early May as a release date though. They were still filming scenes for Cap as last as March. Thor started shooting much earlier than Cap as well.

I recall last year it sort of seemed like they were pushing things really tight since it seemed to take forever to find the Steve Rogers/Captain America actor.

[herolee10]

I think, with audiences being well familiar now with the character that Evans portrayed on screen, along with the popularity being only boosted through "The Avengers", Better marketing, and a release date where it's not competing with any MAJOR film (ala HP, Cowboys and Aliens, etc), then I think the sequel will earn A LOT, course this is all provided that the sequel is written with the same, if not better quality than the first film.

[KangConquers]

184,177,428

That was last week's figure.

[rashad]

That was last week's figure.
Nope it was this weeks. The money it's making during the week has been in the thousands not millions. BOM has an estimated $184,600,000.

But it's really (as of today) $184,526,030
http://uip-boxoffice.com/boxweb.nsf

[TheVileOne]

Well BOM has it at 184.6 million overseas now.

It should pass over $175 million domestically in a couple weekends.

What would be really awesome if it can make another $35 million overseas. I want to see this make $400 million worldwide and surpass Tron: Legacy.

[rashad]

via Screen Daily
Captain America, from Paramount Pictures International (PPI), grossed an estimated $1.7m this weekend from 7,980 venues in 60 markets, for an international total of $186m.

[TheVileOne]

Now about within spitting distance of $175 million. It will for sure get there before it leaves theatres and hits DVD.

I'm expecting it will get about $190-200 million to finish overseas.

[KangConquers]

we look to be heading for a $370 M total gross. A solid mid-tier blockbuster, and a great foundation for a new franchise.

[Vartha]

I'm happy Cap broke 300 mil. I mean I really thought he wasn't going to do too well.

[marcvader]

He fit right in my $300-399 prediction nicely. How about you guys?

[scifiwolf]

Went and saw this again last night on a whim. FULL FREAKIN HOUSE. It was equally as packed as it was on opening night. Couldn't believe it. Kids of all ages, teens, young adults, seniors, you name it. Great energy too. Reactions to all the moments in the movie were great. Buncha girls screamed when Steve threw himself on the grenade.

Even seeing this a second time, it was like seeing this for the first. Tugged at the heartstrings maybe even more than it did the first time. Not only was this my favorite movie of the summer, I'd have to say it was the best. Fun, emotional, universal appeal. Just great.

:up:

[Vartha]

He fit right in my $300-399 prediction nicely. How about you guys?
heh to be honest, I never voted lol I could cheat and vote now. lol

[TheVileOne]

Now over $175 million domestically. It might tiptoe to $176 million before it leaves theatres. Still making $400,000 over the weekend. Not completely out there that it could get $176 million before the DVD hits.

[Superhero 101]

I think cap will end at 365 million

[TheVileOne]

Cap will end at $176 million in the US it looks like since it's about in spitting distance of it. Less than $200K to go.

[marcvader]

Hopefully it could make about 5mil in Japan.

[kedrell]

Cap will end at $176 million in the US it looks like since it's about in spitting distance of it. Less than $200K to go.


Cap'll for sure cross to $176M this weekend and that's the number it'll stay at. So just within 5M of Thor, domestically and I could easily chalk that up to Thor's better release date. So domestically they're basically even for all intents and purposes.

[Spider-Fan]

Cap'll for sure cross to $176M this weekend and that's the number it'll stay at. So just within 5M of Thor, domestically and I could easily chalk that up to Thor's better release date. So domestically they're basically even for all intents and purposes.

Cap also had higher 2D attendance than Thor did. So, Cap may have had higher tickets sales than Thor domestically.

Not trying to make this an Avenger measuring contest. Just measuring up how well Cap did in overall BO this year.

[kedrell]

Cap has crossed to $176M now. It's at $365,671,000 WW. Just opened in Japan yesterday and I'd love it if Cap could pull another $9M from Japan(which would give it enough juice to beat both BB & XMO:W's WW totals). Thor made $5.7M in Japan and XM:FC made about $7.8M so that may be a tall order for Cap. But who knows, it could happen. Domestic is pretty much done except for a few hundred thousand more in the next week or so before it gets pulled from theaters altogether with the Oct. 25th DVD release upcoming. I sure hope Japan can at least get Cap across the $370M WW line(Thor numbers should be enough to do that).

[TheVileOne]

I see it probably topping out at about $370 million worldwide. It did get some extra juice from the dollar theaters actually. I think had the movie had a better marketing push and release date it would've done a lot better.

[kedrell]

Whatever it has left to be earned in it's last week or two in North American theaters is probably enough to push it to $366M based on where it is right now($300K or so to go) which means Japan would only have to kick in $4M to get to $370M. I've love it if Japan ended up kicking in $7M or more so it could pass Wolverine's WW total.

[kedrell]

Well this has got to be the last weekend for Cap's run in North America.

[marcvader]

How's it going in Japan?

[kedrell]

Did about $1.5M from last Saturday(when it was released) to Sunday. 2 days, I have no idea if that's a good start or not but it's 3X more than GL made in Japan already($.5M).

[kedrell]

Domestic final: $176,423,395 as of Sunday and it's probably pulled from all theaters in NA now since the DVD comes out today. Japan's total hasn't been updated since Sunday 10/16/11 and it's WW gross is still at $365,923,395

but that's almost certainly low due to Japan's lack of reporting for the last 9 days. I bet you anything it's actually at at least $367M WW by now if not more.

[Shadowlord X]

CA:TFA has been a moderate success.

I hope it's enough to warrant a sequel in the eyes of MARVEL STUDIOS. I wasn't a big fan of CAP before (although i was heavily anticipating the movie because he's a MARVEL icon) but the movie has made me a real fan. I would love to see some sequels.

[marcvader]

As would I.

[kedrell]

Isn't a sequel already confirmed? I thought it was.

[Vartha]

Pretty sure a sequal will happen lol Heck Cap even beat GL! lol

[Shadowlord X]

Pretty sure a sequal will happen lol Heck Cap even beat GL! lol

LOL. If being more financially succesful than gl is all you need to guarantee a sequel then expect sequels from virtually every movie in existance. LOL.

[Shadowlord X]

Isn't a sequel already confirmed? I thought it was.

In one of the recent interviews with Kevin Feige he said "if we do a CA:TFA sequel". Also it has not been given a release date like THOR 2. Those 2 things are what has me a bit worried. The screenwriters seem to operating as if it's a sure thing though.

[rashad]

Domestic final: $176,423,395 as of Sunday and it's probably pulled from all theaters in NA now since the DVD comes out today. Japan's total hasn't been updated since Sunday 10/16/11 and it's WW gross is still at $365,923,395

but that's almost certainly low due to Japan's lack of reporting for the last 9 days. I bet you anything it's actually at at least $367M WW by now if not more.

THR and Screen Daily reported the overseas numbers.

It's foreign cume is $191M.

[chiefchirpa]

In one of the recent interviews with Kevin Feige he said "if we do a CA:TFA sequel". Also it has not been given a release date like THOR 2. Those 2 things are what has me a bit worried. The screenwriters seem to operating as if it's a sure thing though.

Thor 2 can slink back to fantasy setting, but Cap 2 needs to be set in the real world, current time. There lies the difficulty in making someone running around with colorful uniform & shield believable.

[Avenger]

If they can make a guy using a glowing magnet to keep shrapnel out of his heart and fighting crime in a flying suit of armor believable, then I'm sure they won't have any trouble making Cap in the modern era believable.

[kedrell]

THR and Screen Daily reported the overseas numbers.

It's foreign cume is $191M.


So that would put it at about $367.5M WW right now. Not far from the Batman Begins/X-Men Origins: Wolverine range(low $370's).

[Shadowlord X]

CAP's done fine; with the modern audience franchises like this need to build their audience over time with sequels.