BvS Batman/Superman Pushed Back to 2016 - Part 1

[Lily Adler]

Eh, I'll probably watch it cause I do like me some Rudd.

 

[jmc]

Err RDJ was not a box office draw until after IM came out. Rudd has much more star.power now than RDJ did in 2008

That's not the argument.

 

[Poni_Boy]

That's not the argument.

That's exactly what the argument morphed into. I started out by saying WB would be foolish to open Pan against a Marvel Studios movie when they can simply and easily shift the release to antman's old slot. Then it evolved to star power and character recognition. Which is irrelevant to my comment.

 

[jmc]

RDJ had never been in a blockbuster movie until IM. He'd always had critical acclaim and was known as having good screen charisma. And people liked him, even in his wilder days. People went to see IM because of him.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Rudd's more of a comedy co-star though, no? I think RDJ had at least more critical acclaim.

RDJ had a comeback with IM. The biggest hollywood comeback in history. Before IM he was box office poison

 

[hafizbat]

I just want a good marvel villian besides Loki! If there's one thing dc triumphs in its vilians.

Not true at all.

And many, many more

 

[Unbreakable Lex]

RDJs portrayal of Stark was brilliant and what floated that movie and he single handily boosted Avengers.

 

[jmc]

RDJ had a comeback with IM. The biggest hollywood comeback in history. Before IM he was box office poison

Dude, he was playing parts in dramas and indie film ensembles for years. Don't make it out like he was starring in big movies tanking at the box office.

 

[jaymes_e06]

I liked him in Weird Science.

Everything about Weird Science was win!

 

[Lily Adler]

But Rudd's hotter. Yeah I said it RDJ fans, come and get me.

 

[Xandrea]

Not true at all.

And many, many more

And Marvel can't use any of them.

 

[jmc]

Rudd's actually a pretty good actor.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Dude, he was playing parts in dramas and indie film ensembles for years. Don't make it out like he was starring in big movies tanking at the box office.

I didn't say, or even insinuate that. He made what is considered the biggest comeback in Hollywood history. That's a well regarded statement. He went from a few critically acclaimed small film roles (and his fair share of rom-com failures) to drug problems and arrest issues in the mid 90s. Then he was working his way back into the spotlight by starring in the fourth season of Ally McBeal on TV. But he was arrested again, had to quit the show, and did more jail/rehab time. He was trying once again to make a comeback in the early 2000s with the Woody Allen movie Melinda and Melinda but he couldn't get insured. He finally was able to make a movie with Mel Gibson called The Singing Detective (which bombed and was critically panned) because Gibson paid his insurance bond himself. Then hehas supporting roles (tertiary or less billing) in a bunch of movies like A Scanner Darkly and Zodiac that did nothing for his career. He was all but forgotten by general audiences. He tried to write a memoir but the publisher canceled it.

It was Iron Man and Tropic Thunder that finally made him a star. After two decades of struggling with every aspect of the Hollywood life. He had little star appeal when he was cast as Iron Man. Look at the opening figures of that movie. It was a success because it was a great movie, garnered critical acclaim and had overwhelmingly positive word of mouth. The quality of the movie gave it its legs, not the name "Robert Downey Jr." He's now one of the top three highest paid actors in Hollywood. But back then, not even close to the name recognition Rudd has now.

 

[jmc]

Oh please, he is that movie. Without him it's just another run of the mill superhero film, he is the reason people went back and back again, he elevated an otherwise stock standard superhero flick with a fantastic charismatic performance. So yeah, the name 'Robert Downey Jr' is what gave it its legs.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Oh please, he is that movie. Without him it's just another run of the mill superhero film, he is the reason people went back and back again, he elevated an otherwise stock standard superhero flick with a fantastic charismatic performance. So yeah, the name 'Robert Downey Jr' is what gave it its legs.

You're not differentiating between the performance and the name of the actor. You claim Iron Man was a success right out the door because people wanted to first and foremost see Robert Downey Jr. Not true. At all. NOW they go see him and his movies because of his name. He was not a bankable name before Iron Man 1. Not even close. But I don't have to repeat common knowledge ad nauseum. It's all over the net

www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2013/05/02/robert-downey-jr-is-hollywoods-golden-man/

 

[Poni_Boy]

So maybe he was more 'notorious', but not as 'bankable' or even dependable as Paul Rudd is right now?

Read that link I posted or just google "RDJ drug problems." He was barely insurable in the 2000s, forget bankable. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is what showed Kevin Feige that he could carry a movie with him in the lead as far as performance goes. But even that movie was a BO failure. Shame since I consider it his best one yet.

Paul Rudd has much, much more positive name recognition with audiences across the target demographics for a superhero movie than RDJ did pre-IM. But that's not what I'm saying.

I simply said WB would be foolish to open Pan, what they want to be their next new franchise, against ANY Marvel Studios movie -- especially the first MS movie to hit after Avengers 2. Marvel moved Ant-Man up out of it's original July 31st slot to July 17th. That's when WB announced they will release Pan. It only makes sense now that WB will shift Pan to Ant-Man's old release date of July 31st so as not to compete with MS.

 

[jmc]

You're not differentiating between the performance and the name of the actor. You claim Iron Man was a success right out the door because people wanted to first and foremost see Robert Downey Jr. Not true. At all. NOW they go see him and his movies because of his name. He was not a bankable name before Iron Man 1. Not even close. But I don't have to repeat common knowledge ad nauseum. It's all over the net

www.forbes.com/sites/dorothypomerantz/2013/05/02/robert-downey-jr-is-hollywoods-golden-man/

Not exactly what I claimed but given the first trailer that was released you'd be hard pressed to say that there wasn't anticipation for the movie and in particular his performance. So I kinda stand by what I said.

 

[NoLaNitE007]

Will that? Peter Pan has far more audience recognition than Ant-Man.

Especially with Hugh Jackman and Garrett Hedlund in the film playing bad ass pirates. (The ladies will want to flock if they see shirtless scenes of Jack and Hedlund) If it has some pirate swashbuckling action and if they cast a decent and good looking actress in the female lead....than it will be a nice counter to a relatively unappealing AntMan film.

 

[jmc]

Especially with Hugh Jackman and Garrett Hedlund in the film playing bad ass pirates. (The ladies will want to flock if they see shirtless scenes of Jack and Hedlund) If it has some pirate swashbuckling action and if they cast a decent and good looking actress in the female lead....than it will be a nice counter to a relatively unappealing AntMan film.

If the films do go head to head it's a genuine coin-flip situation IMO. In fact they may just end up cancelling each other out to some degree given they're probably going after the same demographic.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Not exactly what I claimed but given the first trailer that was released you'd be hard pressed to say that there wasn't anticipation for the movie and in particular his performance. So I kinda stand by what I said.

"Where that argument fails is that it was the actor who was the draw not the character."

"People went to see IM because of him."

That's what you said. Maybe you've been into messageboard stuff long enough that you remember there being a big buzz about RDJ playing IM but I can tell you from a general audience perspective he was not the draw. Curiosity? Yes. But his name did not put many asses in seats. He quality of the movie and the quality of his performance where what did. But that wasn't known until after it came out.

 

[NoLaNitE007]

Read that link I posted or just google "RDJ drug problems." He was barely insurable in the 2000s, forget bankable. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is what showed Kevin Feige that he could carry a movie with him in the lead as far as performance goes. But even that movie was a BO failure. Shame since I consider it his best one yet.

Paul Rudd has much, much more positive name recognition with audiences across the target demographics for a superhero movie than RDJ did pre-IM. But that's not what I'm saying.

I simply said WB would be foolish to open Pan, what they want to be their next new franchise, against ANY Marvel Studios movie -- especially the first MS movie to hit after Avengers 2. Marvel moved Ant-Man up out of it's original July 31st slot to July 17th. That's when WB announced they will release Pan. It only makes sense now that WB will shift Pan to Ant-Man's old release date of July 31st so as not to compete with MS.

The general movie going folks will want to see Hugh Jackman and Garrett Hedlund battling it out ahead of not so funny rom com comedian like Paul Rudd and an old timer like Douglas in a not so interesting Phase 3 or 4 Marvel hero.

Antman might do decent opening weekend....but after that....downhill fast I think.

 

[Poni_Boy]

a nice counter to a relatively unappealing AntMan film.

 

[InJustice]

Especially with Hugh Jackman and Garrett Hedlund in the film playing bad ass pirates. (The ladies will want to flock if they see shirtless scenes of Jack and Hedlund) If it has some pirate swashbuckling action and if they cast a decent and good looking actress in the female lead....than it will be a nice counter to a relatively unappealing AntMan film.

How do you know Ant-Man will be unappealing?

 

[Poni_Boy]

The general movie going folks will want to see Hugh Jackman and Garrett Hedlund battling it out ahead of not so funny rom com comedian like Paul Rudd and an old timer like Douglas in a not so interesting Phase 3 or 4 Marvel hero.

Antman might do decent opening weekend....but after that....downhill fast I think.

You're missing the point entirely. WB -- who look at it from a business perspective and not an "I hate marvel movies so I hope they fail" one -- will not take the risk (and it is an undeniable risk) to open their next franchise against ANY Marvel Studios movie. Especially the one coming out a few months after Avengers 2. WB worry about risk mitigation for their releases more than any other studio. If they are adamant about releasing the movie in July 2015 their two options are:

1 ) Flip the coin and hope it does well against a Marvel Studios movie -- again, risking their Hobbit replacing franchise potential

2 ) Move it two weeks back to a weekend where there's very little competition

It's common sense

 

[jmc]

''Where that argument fails is that it was the actor who was the draw not the character.''

''People went to see IM because of him.''

That's what you said. Maybe you've been into messageboard stuff long enough that you remember there being a big buzz about RDJ playing IM but I can tell you from a general audience perspective he was not the draw. Curiosity? Yes. But his name did not put many asses in seats. He quality of the movie and the quality of his performance where what did. But that wasn't known until after it came out.

I think you're miss interpreting what I've been saying, or I haven't worded my posts well enough, but whatever, it happens often in message boards. Frankly I can't be bothered going back correcting things.