BvS Batman V Superman Box Office Prediction - - - - Part 13

[DarthSkywalker]

The movie is far from crap; it's just that it's unappealing to children and families and many other demographics because it's dreary and depressing. It's visually dark, taking place mainly at night and being comprised of muted colors, and it features a grim story in which people are killed (e.g. Batman crushing people with the Batmobile and tearing them to bits with its front-mounted machine gun, Lex Luthor killing hundreds of politicians via a terrorist attack at a senate hearing, militant contractors gunning down African rebels, etc). This is not a film that parents would take their children to see and is not a film that escapists want to see. However, it is not bad.

And many disagree, including myself.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No

and despite what Zero Effect said, no one on this thread that is not a troll considers it a bomb

 

[Tacit Ronin]

The movie is far from crap; it's just that it's unappealing to children and families and many other demographics because it's dreary and depressing. It's visually dark, taking place mainly at night and being comprised of muted colors, and it features a grim story in which people are killed (e.g. Batman crushing people with the Batmobile and tearing them to bits with its front-mounted machine gun, Lex Luthor killing hundreds of politicians via a terrorist attack at a senate hearing, militant contractors gunning down African rebels, etc). This is not a film that parents would take their children to see and is not a film that escapists want to see. However, it is not bad.

So WB are idiots. The film you describe should've been a 50 million dollar prestige picture. Not a 250 million dollar product designed for the masses.

 

[jokesonm3]

Don't worry, there won't be a big opening to save the next one.

Forreal i said this over at the JL box office thread, i highly believe that Justice League: Part One, isn't even going to surpass Man of Steel the Box Office if Snyder returns, the pudding is in the proof I.E. BvS box office, WB dont have the luxury of a massive opening weekend anymore and bad legs are inevitable.

God the BvS Box Office is such an eye opener.

 

[Zero_Effect]

If it makes around $800m, it loses money. A lot of money. According to Deadline, it needs to make around $930m to not lose money before home media, tv rights, etc. This was the idea when it was going to make a bigger chunk domestically. So it might actually be a bomb at the box office.

Um it was $925M & it was the projected B.O take, not what it had to make to not lose money.

“It will not make a profit in the way that Zootopia (global B.O. $698M, cost $150M) or Deadpool (global B.O. $746M, cost $58M) have,” said our source. We’ve heard that any B.O. figure north of $800M was considered a good start for DC movies 2.0.

http://deadline.com/2016/03/batman-v-superman-opening-weekend-box-office-records-1201726300/

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They do not make these movies to split small profits among investors. What is the point of spending over $400m to make $100m? These people can make more money putting their cash in the bank.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I wonder if WB will bill Snyder's name in the trailers of Justice League. "From the visionary director of BvS!"

 

[Axl Van Sixx]

The movie is far from crap; it's just that it's unappealing to children and families and many other demographics because it's dreary and depressing. It's visually dark, taking place mainly at night and being comprised of muted colors, and it features a grim story in which people are killed (e.g. Batman crushing people with the Batmobile and tearing them to bits with its front-mounted machine gun, Lex Luthor killing hundreds of politicians via a terrorist attack at a senate hearing, militant contractors gunning down African rebels, etc). This is not a film that parents would take their children to see and is not a film that escapists want to see. However, it is not bad.

Alright, I keep hearing this, but at the risk of sounding like a grumpy old man, I have to ask: What's wrong with kids (or more to the point, their parents) today?

I was only five years old when a little R-rated movie called Terminator 2 came out. The studio marketed toys to kids based on the film. My parents let me watch it, and I wasn't alone in this, because I know tons of movie fans of my vintage whose parents let them watch bloody, violent R-rated movies like Robocop or Terminator back in the day.

To quote the Joker: "What happened? Did your balls drop off?" I keep hearing people saying a PG-13 movie like Batman v Superman is just too scary and violent for little kids, and the reason for its box office disappointment is because it wasn't family-friendly enough. To which I can only reply: What a bunch of babies. Can you say overprotective? Maybe it was just a different time, but still ...

Also, I seem to recall a certain Batman movie back in 2008 that featured a certain disappearing pencil trick, performed by a psychotic mass-murdering clown who also perpetrated acts of terrorism, while the ostensible hero of the story tortured people for information. All the people now saying BvS isn't kid- or family-friendly enough - where were they in 2008? Taking their kids to see The Dark Knight. Is it just because they liked that movie better than BvS?

I'm just puzzled by the double standard. End of rant.

 

[writer0327]

The movie is far from crap; it's just that it's unappealing to children and families and many other demographics because it's dreary and depressing. It's visually dark, taking place mainly at night and being comprised of muted colors, and it features a grim story in which people are killed (e.g. Batman crushing people with the Batmobile and tearing them to bits with its front-mounted machine gun, Lex Luthor killing hundreds of politicians via a terrorist attack at a senate hearing, militant contractors gunning down African rebels, etc). This is not a film that parents would take their children to see and is not a film that escapists want to see. However, it is not bad.

It's everything you said and it's crap.

Maybe if this was Jason Bourne v James Bond it would be acceptable, but it ain't. That's why it's crap.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Um it was $925M & it was the projected B.O take, not what it had to make to not lose money.

“It will not make a profit in the way that Zootopia (global B.O. $698M, cost $150M) or Deadpool (global B.O. $746M, cost $58M) have,” said our source. We’ve heard that any B.O. figure north of $800M was considered a good start for DC movies 2.0.

http://deadline.com/2016/03/batman-v-superman-opening-weekend-box-office-records-1201726300/

Did you read it? Because I did.

Warner Bros.’ Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice might come up $3.7M million short of breaking even in its global theatrical run. However, the first title in DC features 2.0., which was blasted by critics with a 29% Rotten score and given a B CinemaScore from audiences, likely will turn a minimum profit of $207.9M once all revenue streams are accounted. Warner Bros provided no comment about BvS projections. Financial analysts today assembled a bare-minimum projection for the Zack Snyder movie, which is projected to turn in a domestic B.O. of $375M (2.25 times its $166M FSS) and a global take of $925M.

The reason I say around $930m, because making $925m left it in a hole of $3.7m. That is why it mentions not breaking even on a global theatrical run of the numbers they are using.

Notice how the projections are much better then what it will end up with? Yeah, they are losing money on the theatrical run.

 

[Flickster]

No, it's crap. One of the worst I've seen from this genre.

Your opinion is not fact. Having said that, in my opinion, both Man of Steel and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice provide a superior experience than all Marvel films, barring Captain America: The Winter Soldier (which is only slightly below them in my book), because both films feature stories that genuinely give the impression that the stakes are high and feature villains who truly convey a sense of urgency; in both films, people (whether they be innocents or the villains themselves) actually die or are seriously hurt. You don't get that with Marvel films, barring Quicksilver.

Furthermore, the drama surrounding the titular characters is much more intense and realistic, such as the world's divided stance regarding Superman and his subsequent gloomy nature or Batman's failed efforts at effecting a lower crime rate, as well as his loss of comrades, and his subsequent abandonment of his vow to never kill.


Say what you will, but in my opinion the DCEU is superior to the MCU; it features better films. Period.

 

[Spidey_62]

So WB are idiots. The film you describe should've been a 50 million dollar prestige picture. Not a 250 million dollar product designed for the masses.

Exactly, the film isn't accessible. It alienates the audience with all of the heavy-handed real world terror allegories and philosophy book readings, I guess that stuff appeals to some people for some reason but the majority of filmgoers don't want to see any of that in Batman v Superman. It's ill-conceived and poorly executed.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I wonder if WB will bill Snyder's name in the
trailers of Justice League. "From the visionary director of BvS!"

"Chris, can we please use your name again? PLEASE!?!?!?!?!"

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Exactly, the film isn't accessible. It alienates the audience with all of the heavy-handed real world terror allegories and philosophy book readings, I guess that stuff appeals to some people for some reason but the majority of filmgoers don't want to see any of that in Batman v Superman.

Did you not watch TDKR?

 

[FunkMiller]

Your opinion is not fact. Having said that, in my opinion, both Man of Steel and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice provide a superior experience than all Marvel films, barring Captain America: The Winter Soldier (which is only slightly below them in my book), because both films feature stories that genuinely give the impression that the stakes are high and feature villains who truly convey a sense of urgency; in both films, people (whether they be innocents or the villains themselves) actually die or are seriously hurt. You don't get that with Marvel films, barring Quicksilver.

Furthermore, the drama surrounding the titular characters is much more intense and realistic, such as the world's divided stance regarding Superman and his subsequent gloomy nature or Batman's failed efforts at effecting a lower crime rate, as well as his loss of comrades, and his subsequent abandonment of his vow to never kill.


Say what you will, but in my opinion the DCEU is superior to the MCU; it features better films. Period.

Yick. If you think this movie is realistic...

 

[SomeOldGuy]

So WB are idiots. The film you describe should've been a 50 million dollar prestige picture. Not a 250 million dollar product designed for the masses.

Yes, exactly, WB are idiots. At the end of the day this seems tome all too similar to the Josh Trank situation on FanFourStick: Fox handed him a pile of money and then never paid attention he was producing a pile of dung until it was all gone.

Didn't anyone at WB look at the script or the dailies? Batman killing people, whole crowds getting blown up, Superman being killed...no one waved a red flag? Non one pointed out how it wouldn't appeal to exactly the mass audience they gave Snyder $250 million to reach?

I know it's popular to bash Snyder but the people really to blame are the ones in the WB executive suite.

 

[Pickle-El]

If it makes around $800m, it loses money. A lot of money. According to Deadline, it needs to make around $930m to not lose money before home media, tv rights, etc. This was the idea when it was going to make a bigger chunk domestically. So it might actually be a bomb at the box office.

Let's call it 875$ million? Maybe a little less.

When it's all said and done, box office wise, maybe the Deadline 200+ million surplus they were expecting will be closer to 125+million all revenue accounted for. But, it won't lose money.

They were praying for huge front-loading on a film like this because they keep that higher percentage first couple weeks. The longer it goes, the less they keep week to week even if it somehow develops even average legs.

 

[All-Father]

Your opinion is not fact. Having said that, in my opinion, both Man of Steel and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice provide a superior experience than all Marvel films, barring Captain America: The Winter Soldier (which is only slightly below them in my book), because both films feature stories that genuinely give the impression that the stakes are high and feature villains who truly convey a sense of urgency; in both films, people (whether they be innocents or the villains themselves) actually die or are seriously hurt. You don't get that with Marvel films, barring Quicksilver.

Furthermore, the drama surrounding the titular characters is much more intense and realistic, such as the world's divided stance regarding Superman and his subsequent gloomy nature or Batman's failed efforts at effecting a lower crime rate, as well as his loss of comrades, and his subsequent abandonment of his vow to never kill.


Say what you will, but in my opinion the DCEU is superior to the MCU; it features better films. Period.

Too bad the reviews and reception corroborate my opinion, not yours. This movie is still crap.

 

[JtheDreamer]

so, would BvS be considered a "bomb?"

A massive underachievement at the very least. Three of the most widely known comic book heroes in CB history and they can't even crack a billion, get crapped on by critics, and poor WOM.

 

[Flickster]

Alright, I keep hearing this, but at the risk of sounding like a grumpy old man, I have to ask: What's wrong with kids (or more to the point, their parents) today?

I was only five years old when a little R-rated movie called Terminator 2 came out. The studio marketed toys to kids based on the film. My parents let me watch it, and I wasn't alone in this, because I know tons of movie fans of my vintage whose parents let them watch bloody, violent R-rated movies like Robocop or Terminator back in the day.

To quote the Joker: "What happened? Did your balls drop off?" I keep hearing people saying a PG-13 movie like Batman v Superman is just too scary and violent for little kids, and the reason for its box office disappointment is because it wasn't family-friendly enough. To which I can only reply: What a bunch of babies. Can you say overprotective? Maybe it was just a different time, but still ...

Also, I seem to recall a certain Batman movie back in 2008 that featured a certain disappearing pencil trick, performed by a psychotic mass-murdering clown who also perpetrated acts of terrorism, while the ostensible hero of the story tortured people for information. All the people now saying BvS isn't kid- or family-friendly enough - where were they in 2008? Taking their kids to see The Dark Knight. Is it just because they liked that movie better than BvS?

I'm just puzzled by the double standard. End of rant.

This is a new era in which comic-book movies are judged according to the standards created by Marvel's films, which are what the mainstream audience prefers. Remember, The Dark Knight was released back in 2008, which was around the time that Marvel began releasing its movies. Therefore, the standard created by Marvel wasn't around back then.

 

[FunkMiller]

Yes, exactly, WB are idiots. At the end of the day this seems tome all too similar to the Josh Trank situation on FanFourStick: Fox handed him a pile of money and then never paid attention he was producing a pile of dung until it was all gone.

Didn't anyone at WB look at the script or the dailies? Batman killing people, whole crowds getting blown up, Superman being killed...no one waved a red flag? Non one pointed out how it wouldn't appeal to exactly the mass audience they gave Snyder $250 million to reach?

I know it's popular to bash Snyder but the people really to blame are the ones in the WB executive suite.

But... but.... DARK! GRITTY! GROWN UP!

 

[Bats123]

"Chris, can we please use your name again? PLEASE!?!?!?!?!"

"From executive producer Christopher Nolan"

 

[Spidey_62]

Did you not watch TDKR?

Pretty much all of the commentary in the Nolan Batman films was handled in satisfying ways that added to the narratives. Batman v Superman didn't feel like it even had a cohesive narrative and was just saying these things because it wanted to handle some edgy things.

 

[Flickster]

Too bad the reviews and reception corroborate my opinion, not yours. This movie is still crap.

Just because an opinion is held by the majority doesn't mean that it's fact; it's still just an opinion.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

This is a new era in which comic-book movies are judged according to the standards created by Marvel's films

Days of the Future Past.