Originally Posted by Showtime029
It could have been due to the \S/ itself sure, it could have been a combination, or not at all. I thought we were discussing Legendary here, and if the budget is lowered and possible sequel includes more action and a supervillian, how could Legendary not make money?
Many were disappointed? Define many?
This is all speculation anyway. It will all be revealed soon enough and we can talk facts rather than speculation.
As Legendary goes so would the other potential co-financiers WB deals with. If Legendary bails I doubt WB will be able to line up another investor production company. The numbers Legendary bases its decision on will be the same numbers the other companies see and if fronting up to 100 million for a SR sequel does not make financial sense to Legendary, its likely won't to the others either.
IMO the reason a sequel is financially not viable is because its almost impossible for a sequel to make more than SR's 200 million.
In part as the sequel will not have the advantage SR did of being the first Superman film in years. That alone turned out some for SR but a sequel won't have that draw.
More action could make up for this somewhat but that means kic* a** trailers and I doubt Singer and company can do that kind of trailer. Using the poor trailers for SR as a guide of what to expect.
But even if the action is good the baggage reamains. Routh and Bosworth failed to engage audiences with their performances and basically that means there is no ongoing emotional buy in to the characters. Its why WOM was awful and why no one seems interested in seeing Superman return for a sequel. Not to mention poor writing, poor editing, the kid. The perception is that SR was perhaps the biggest disappointment of 2006. That is what audiences will remember and that will keep them away and threaten a sequel with a smaller BO even that SR.
Yes the budget will be cut around 50 million - which begs th question how can they do the absolutely needed 4 or 5 major action scenes on a much smaller budget - and that makes a defacto profit that SR did not have. But that is not a significant sum given the investment. The worry is too that the budget cut could hamper the action and actually lead to an even lesser BO for the sequel than for SR.
The financials simply don't warrant a sequel. The parallel to Hulk is striking. Lee said for almost a year after the Hulk release there would be a sequel, but the studio finally stepped in and said no.
The fact we have heard absolutely nothing from WB for 5 months, despite what Spacey or Harris may have said in passing, is the key here and an indication IMO that the studio is not at all happy with the franchise or solid on a sequel.
Its almost been a year for SR as it was for the Hulk so hopefully it won't be long now before WB puts this horse out to pasture. Only then can Superman start to get out from under the cloud SR and Singer have cast over the franchise. We will also be able to start the countdown - granted a long 15 or 20 year countdown - to the eventual reboot/relaunch of the franchise.