View Single Post
Old 12-15-2013, 10:06 PM   #99
InJustice's Avatar
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,778
Default Re: The box office "bar of success" for Batman/ Superman.

Originally Posted by KangConquers View Post
Batman is a bigger name than Christopher Nolan.

Many said Amazing Spider-Man was going to bomb because no one wanted a reboot. It didn't perform as well as the previous installment, but still did well. 25% drop domestic, 10% drop foreign.

My thought process is that the whole "Christopher Nolan" whining and ranting will only extend to these shores, and that half of the fans that would have left due to a reboot, will stick around due to curiosity over the two most famous Superheroes of all time finally duking it out, and teaming together. I see this doing roughly $400 M domestic, or about a 10% drop from The Dark Knight Rises.

Foreign box-office is a different story. This is the sort of movie foreign audiences eat up. Giant, bombastic, 3-D, with two icons (one of whom, is the only eponymous film character to have 2 $1 B movies.) I'm saying the absolute floor for this is $600 M foreign.

Calling this a Man of Steel II is incredibly reductive, when a Super Hero more popular than Superman is co-starring. That's why the Dark Knight/ DKR's performances matter to this film.
Batman is a bigger name than Nolan, but if Affleck's character isn't well-received by the audience, then the big name argument doesn't hold up all that well.

Spider-Man is popular anyways, so any minority that said that ASM reboot wasn't going to do well was out of their minds. And if I recall, Andrew Garfield was well-received, so that also helps. Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but I see this in at least 300M domestic, I'd need to see something for me to either increase or decrease my prediction. I'm also unsure that this is going to be the $400mil domestic kind of movie as we've yet to see anything other than the two iconic characters.

How is calling this movie MOSII reductive? Just because Batman is in the film, it doesn't mean that Superman's story arc is irrelevant. I stand by calling this a Man of Steel sequel because of the following comment by Goyer:

“It is our intention that, in success, [Man of Steel] would be the zero issue and from this point onward, possible films could expand into a shared universe. In our world, the Man of Steel world, Zack has gone on record saying that we’re implying there are other superheroes in this world. But I don’t know that they’ve come forward yet. The idea is that Superman is the first one. There might be people helping people, but not in costumes, and that Superman comes forward and announces himself to the world. In him announcing himself, he’s the one that changes things.”
Until there is further notice from Warner Bros. that this is not a MOS movie, then I'll change my mind, but for now, this is definitely a Man of Steel sequel. Batman being there doesn't change anything.

Originally Posted by KangConquers View Post
These aren't unfamiliar characters though. It doesn't matter that it's not Richard Donner's Superman, or Christopher Nolan's Batman. We have seen these two characters in a combined Thirteen films, 3 live action tv series, 5-6 animated series, and about 40 video games. While many people knew, for example, who Captain America was, they didn't know anything about him. That's not the case for Superman and Batman.
That wasn't the point. It's one thing to have unfamiliar characters, it's another thing entirely to have audiences be charmed by how the character is written as well as how the character is portrayed. As I've said, if the character + actor isn't well received, then it's not going to work out all that well (Brandon Routh is a good example).

Originally Posted by KangConquers View Post
The people who thought Man of Steel was an auto-billion were basing it on nothing but wishful thinking. I'm basing it on taking a movie that grossed $665 Million, and adding an EVEN MORE popular character to the sequel.

Two years ago, there were people arguing The Avengers would only be marginally more successful than Iron Man 2. We saw how those predictions went; Avengers outgrossed Iron Man by nearly 900 Million. I'm arguing that the presence of Batman will add at least $350 to the box office. I don't think that's unreasonable.
The thing is, out of the $$ that Man of Steel made, you've got to have some feeling that some will probably give up because it wasn't their Superman. So that lowers the earning potential for the next film, or at the very least, makes it difficult for the sequel to win them over. And as I've said, until people get to know Affleck's Batman, then we won't know the true potential of this film.

InJustice is offline   Reply With Quote