All Things Superman: An Open Discussion - Part 2

[--Zero-Ethic--]

I've read through this little Superman vs. Star Trek (FYI, I am not a fan of either really...) but honestly I think some around here are just not reading the posts. There is a HUGE difference between a "who's movie will do better" discussion, AND "what movies will possibly hurt the bottomline of another movie" It is VERY OBVIOUS, BEYOND BELIEF actually that Showtime was speaking of the latter. How the heck did anyone take it any differently?

You callin' me fat?

 

[Kelly]

You callin' me fat?

You're good.....lol

 

[Dr.]

I certainly can Dr. I have a lot of facts on the subject that I can link you too or send as attachments. I'll gather some info together for you.

...Nobody said it isn't relevant, it's just AS relevant.

Oh, I didn’t expect you to do research on my account. I just thought you might know off the top of your head.

After a modest search of my own, I came across a journalist and author named Edward Jay Epstein who specializes in the business of Hollywood. According to him, studios take about 50% of the domestic BO. (This I knew already.) But Epstein does go on to mention what the foreign percentage is. It’s less – but not a lot less.

Last year [2004], the studios’ share averaged about 40 per cent of [foreign] ticket sales.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/5885934/How-film-studios-make-money

So, all things being equal, the foreign BO is slightly less “relevant” than the domestic. But it turns out that all things are not equal. On a film like Quantum of Solace, for example, 40% of its “foreign” $418 million amounted to more actual dollars than 50% of its “domestic” $168 million.

Of course, we must extend the numbers beyond a single example. And according to a WSJ article, the advantage goes decisively to “foreign”:

The rising clout of international audiences is a sea change for Hollywood. Decades ago, a movie's foreign box office barely registered with studio executives. Now, foreign ticket sales represent nearly 68% of the roughly $32 billion global film market…

http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704913304575371394036766312.html

So, by the numbers, foreign revenues are more relevant to the studios’ bottom line than domestic.

Cheers,

 

[--Zero-Ethic--]

You're good.....lol

lol

 

[Kelly]

I think that the International box office is "becoming" more of a force. A lot of times the distribution is a *****... but as some of these countries open up there markets more to American films, then yeah they will become more of a force. Right now, it really goes by genre of movie, as to how relevant the International Box Office is to a movie's bottomline.

 

[BlueLantern]

Only with Superman can 200 million dollars follow the word "only."

Pretty much the problem that Warners had with Returns. They expected more. To paraphrase Frank Miller, he's the goddamn Superman.

Considering TDK made a billion, Superman is as well known as Batman and deserves a film to compare to TDK.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

If certain posters can't calm down and stop getting fanboy trollish because they refuse to accept that not everyone is automatically "YA! They're making another Superman movie! It's gonna be AWESOMEZ!" then take a chill pill and grow up. Preferably in that order.

If it is in fact going to be December 2012 with The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, Star Trek 2 and The Man of Steel, my money would be on the Trek sequel as the big winner stateside.

That reboot was incredibly popular with the general public and critics, did $260 million in the US (a huge number all to itself but also when you compare to fellow wildly loved franchise re-starters Batman Begins and Casino Royale) and did something I never thought was possible. It made Star Trek cool. That sequel will be a monster where ever they slot it outside of The Dark Knight Rises.

The Superman franchise is at a crucial stage because of the lawsuits and, in a way, in the same position Trek was before Abrams and his guys took over. This is do or die, baby. If WB could have figured out a solution/direction for the film series, they'd have already done it without handing the keys over to Nolan and letting him do whatever he pleases with it.

You can't just slap on the \S/ logo on one-sheets and flash a Christmas Day 2012 release and say, "Now...it's time to let the money pour in!" They did that on Superman Returns and the grosses fell short of expectations because they, foolishly, didn't think beyond that with general audiences. Again something the Trek people made a point to avoid with their marketing - much to their credit and success.

As for The Hobbit? There is no way Peter Jackson would be running to Facebook as often as he has if these movies were sure-things to do killer business domestically. No matter how popular The Lord of the Rings trilogy was (and boy was it; I love em myself), that was ten years ago. Tastes, trends, etc. change. Like Superman (and Star Trek...and Batman...and James Bond), they're trying to make this series relevant in the eyes of modern movie-goers again. But as we saw with Shrek Forever After and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, the international numbers on that one will be ginormous. So they're good to go.

Can all three co-exist and all do huge business? Absolutely. As been pointed out, we saw that back in 2009 with Avatar, Sherlock Holmes and Alvin & the Chipmunks 2. But to think they wouldn't chip at one another (since they're all going after the same audience during an extended period of time where a lot of people pay $$$ to go see movies) is crazy.

But...just my $.02 on the matter.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I agree with FMJ. Chill pills need to be taken

I love Superman as well. He is one of my 5 favorite superheroes ever, and he started it all. But, expecting it to be the biggest movie ever or able to crush competition like The Hobbit (which had previous films that were more highly regared and bigger than Superman's last effort), I think you're all going to end up wrong. I think this will be successful, but lower your expectations.

 

[GreenKToo]

As others have said, the trek reboot got folks excited for trek again, so unless the world ends or abrams loses his touch, trek II will be a hit, and a big one most likely.

As for the hobbit, nuff said.

I wouldn't be surprised if WB has already decided to move MOS. I can't see them hurting supe's last best chance by putting one of their own films up against him.
The only question for me is where will they move it?

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, they need to be really, really careful about how they market it. I think DC/WB learned a lesson with Green Lantern. I was one of the ones that actually liked the first trailer and could see past the shoddy special effects because I knew they'd be improved upon. The trouble is, not everybody thinks that way. A lot of people, even after seeing the new footage of that film, still revert back to the "Well, the first trailer was crap so this movie's gonna suck" approach. Perhaps those people are just going to hate the movie no matter what, but as they say, you never get a second chance to make a first impression.

Therefore, it would be in their best interests to steer clear of releasing any type of footage that isn't finished. And WHATEVER you do, don't play up any comedic elements because apparently in terms of any comic book superhero movie not named Iron Man, it's some horrible blasphemy to acknowledge humor. Rather, just start out with a teaser that was similar to what we got for SR (and Abrams' Star Trek, for that matter). Just some good solid shots, epic music and good dialogue. And just let it resonate.

And then release a good, solid trailer with shedloads of cool scenes and effects. And most importantly (I think) make it clear that we're going to be seeing a movie ABOUT Superman, and not a movie where Superman is just there to swoop in and save the day. Sell the character to the audience.

 

[GreenKToo]

MOS will need marketing on the scale of what TDK had, or even more and bigger.

IMHO, The lesson WB SHOULD have learned from SR is, the name Superman alone will not sale it.
Look at the opening weekend SR had..it was something like 53/54 million ( I may be off a little, but not by much) THAT was before wom had even really kicked in good. That was lackluster for a Superman film, especially so since it had been about 20 years since he was last seen on the big screen.

They may not want to spend the kinda money it would take on it's marketing, if they don't, it could be trouble.

 

[Solidus]

I guess my post got lost in the angry mess that was the last few pages lol. Again I will say I think Thanksgiving would allow breathing room for these three films, and allow them all to do well. But we shall see.

 

[GreenKToo]

They dont have much of a choice..Correct me if i'm wrong but doesn't it HAVE to be out in 2012?

 

[Doc Ock]

I really do think if MOS will go up against Star Trek or The Hobbit it will be in trouble. But I doubt something like that will happen. How often do big blockbusters go up against each other?

I do agree the name Superman alone won't be enough to sell the film.

 

[GreenKToo]

I really do think if MOS will go up against Star Trek or The Hobbit it will be in trouble. But I doubt something like that will happen. How often do big blockbusters go up against each other?

I do agree the name Superman alone won't be enough to sell the film.

showy or someone else can correct me, but if i'm not mistaken, a few years ago we had shrek, spidey, and pirates all out at the same time and each made major bank...thats rare tho.
Each film had already had a successful previous film do well. Superman won't have that luxury where trek and the hobbit will.

 

[Zorex]

I really do think if MOS will go up against Star Trek or The Hobbit it will be in trouble. But I doubt something like that will happen. How often do big blockbusters go up against each other?

Sometimes logic escapes the decision makers. As much as I'd hate to see it go up against either Trek or Hobbit, I'm not going to say it's out of the question.

I do agree the name Superman alone won't be enough to sell the film.

I agree. I'm thinking that after Returns' relatively traditional approach and its lackluster marketing, they're going to aim to do some big, attention-grabbing and possibly unexpected things to get butts into theatre seats. I just hope they don't stray too far from the essence of the character in setting the film apart from what's come before.

 

[GreenKToo]

I wouldn't be surprised if we start out with the classic suit, then something happens about halfway through, ie, a fight, or a major explosion in space. It destroys the suit and almost kills him, and he gets a new suit, something similar to what we saw in the pic of the JL.

That seems like something WB would do. That would please some of the fans who want classic, and some of the fans who want an updated suit. It would also cover their behinds for the next film in case things dont go their way in court.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

showy or someone else can correct me, but if i'm not mistaken, a few years ago we had shrek, spidey, and pirates all out at the same time and each made major bank...thats rare tho.

No, you're right. Showtime and I talked about that as a matter of fact this afternoon. All three did $300+ million and all three were released in May 2007. But again like I said, they definitely chipped away from one another where they would have made more money were they not all released weeks apart like they were.

 

[Alien Anal]

Hopefully ill say this properly

I think when it comes to updating the suit past the traditional look we all know, the films dont need to really go as far as the comics have.
The comics have been around for so long now that there has been plenty of time to "modernise" and change the costume. Its the world of comics..you can pretty much do what you want and fix it in a few months time if it doesnt work.

As for the films, this is only the 5th or 6th time (guessing) that we have seen Superman on screen, I think the G.A are still willing to accept the traditional costume.

The man makes the costume.

I think the costume works in the same way that most fashion works, an example is Famous rock musicians. It can look stupid but if the person wearing it is powerful enough it will look awesome no matter what.

 

[GreenKToo]

thanx jamie

A.A., I'm all for the claasic suit, I really hope that's what we get, but I wont be surprised if we get something different/updated.

 

[Doc Ock]

Sometimes logic escapes the decision makers. As much as I'd hate to see it go up against either Trek or Hobbit, I'm not going to say it's out of the question.

I don't mean to sound pessimistic but If MOS goes up against either one I will fear the worst for Supes film future. Those two films will be hard to top in the Box Office IMO.

I agree. I'm thinking that after Returns' relatively traditional approach and its lackluster marketing, they're going to aim to do some big, attention-grabbing and possibly unexpected things to get butts into theatre seats. I just hope they don't stray too far from the essence of the character in setting the film apart from what's come before.

I don't even really remember any marketing for SR other than a trailer I saw in theaters. I think focusing on superhero "action" as in flying people fighting each other and other "epic" things would help sell the movie. If you get what I mean.

No, you're right. Showtime and I talked about that as a matter of fact this afternoon. All three did $300+ million and all three were released in May 2007. But again like I said, they definitely chipped away from one another where they would have made more money were they not all released weeks apart like they were.

Woah! Thats insane!

thanx jamie

A.A., I'm all for the claasic suit, I really hope that's what we get, but I wont be surprised if we get something different/updated.

I just what the suit to look like a form of Superman suit. I think alot of superhero films have done well with the respective suits of the characters.

 

[GreenKToo]

I don't mean to sound pessimistic but If MOS goes up against either one I will fear the worst for Supes film future. Those two films will be hard to top in the Box Office IMO.



I don't even really remember any marketing for SR other than a trailer I saw in theaters. I think focusing on superhero "action" as in flying people fighting each other and other "epic" things would help sell the movie. If you get what I mean.



Woah! Thats insane!



I just what the suit to look like a form of Superman suit. I think alot of superhero films have done well with the respective suits of the characters.

I'm not completely anal about it. As long as I think ''thats superman'' when I first see it, i'm good.
That said, I sure as hell don't want them to go the burton route either and reimagine the suit to the point that they should have to call it anything but a superman film..
It's a fine line they'll have to walk designing it.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Superman is as well known as Batman and deserves a film to compare to TDK

You should see Superman : The movie

 

[GreenKToo]

If MOS can make I.M. type numbers, and generate the same sorta excitement, then it will be a success.
I really think that folks hoping for TDK level of success are gonna be sorely disappointed.
Hell, i'm afraid to even say it will do I.M. numbers until we see the suit, hear who the rest of the cast are, the story, the score, etc etc, yadda yadda.

 

[SuperDaniel]

You should see Superman : The movie

Its not in that level, imo.