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

[JOE]

I'm one of the few people who like this film. So, it really pains me to see it performing so poorly. For crying out loud, look at my setup.

Still an awesome setup man! I dig it!

 

[Gerontophobe]

I thought it would make about IM3 numbers. What was your prediction (DOM and WW....no fudging )? I felt CA:CW would come in a little bit higher, but had them in the same ballpark.

I don't think they would have sunk the kind of money they did into a movie that was going to make 800-900M, but I could be wrong. I understand why Marvel did CA and Thor. They made "some" money and set the stage for the big one (Avengers). Sup and BM are A listers and I think what people are talking about now is on the very low side of what could have been. They had a fairly good corridor without a lot of heavyweight competition.

Before tracking came out, I predicted $185M OW, $515M DOM, and $1.3B WW. For some crazy reason, I assumed WB wouldn't allow Snyder to make a bad film.

I still would defend that these numbers were possible for the flick had the quality been better.

 

[Kanon]

Monday gross for some movies have been twitted, not BvS nor Zootopia, weird...

BoxOffice ‏@BoxOffice
MIRACLES FROM HEAVEN took in $0.519M on Monday and has grossed $47.05M to date domestically. #MiraclesFromHeaven

https://***********/BoxOffice/status/717409994380017664

BoxOffice ‏@BoxOffice
MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING 2 took in $0.785M on Monday and has grossed $37.37M to date domestically. #MyBigFatGreekWedding2

https://***********/BoxOffice/status/717409767581487104

 

[Poni_Boy]

I'm one of the few people who like this film. So, it really pains me to see it performing so poorly. For crying out loud, look at my setup.

Don't let it get to you. I've got a few thousand dollars of Rocketeer stuff in my living room. Doesn't matter what the consensus is if you love something.

 

[MadVillainy]

Before tracking came out, I predicted $185M OW, $515M DOM, and $1.3B WW. For some crazy reason, I assumed WB wouldn't allow Snyder to make a bad film.

I still would defend that these numbers were possible for the flick had the quality been better.

For sure they were possible.

That's why it's funny to me to see people come out and act like it's not weird, bad, or whatever that this might not hit a billion

 

[Flickster]

Still an awesome setup man! I dig it!

Don't let it get to you. I've got a few thousand dollars of Rocketeer stuff in my living room. Doesn't matter what the consensus is if you love something.

Thanks, mates.

 

[wobbly]

Monday gross for some movies have been twitted, not BvS nor Zootopia, weird...


https://***********/BoxOffice/status/717409994380017664


https://***********/BoxOffice/status/717409767581487104

Might be waiting for the days trading to end.

 

[Flickster]

Monday gross for some movies have been twitted, not BvS nor Zootopia, weird...


https://***********/BoxOffice/status/717409994380017664


https://***********/BoxOffice/status/717409767581487104

They just put up Zootopia's Monday gross (1.4M).

Link.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Might be waiting for the days trading to end.

HAH I had that exact same thought. Anytime numbers are unusually withheld smells trouble.

 

[baerrtt]

Don't let it get to you. I've got a few thousand dollars of Rocketeer stuff in my living room. Doesn't matter what the consensus is if you love something.

As much as I despised BVS I always think back to the summer blockbuster season of '82 and any cinemagoers then that, say, came out of BLADE RUNNER or THE THING loving them only to realise that the critical and commercial reception was underwhelming to say the least only to be vindicated years later.

I suppose the difference is neither of those movies, despite the money spent on them back in the day, had the kind of expectations this property had hence why many of us are baffled at Snyder, IMO, screwing up a sure thing so easily.

 

[Stark Bauer]

Before tracking came out, I predicted $185M OW, $515M DOM, and $1.3B WW. For some crazy reason, I assumed WB wouldn't allow Snyder to make a bad film.

I still would defend that these numbers were possible for the flick had the quality been better.

Much respect for admitting to expecting over a billion.

I loved the Rocketeer!!! Wish they would do another movie with that Art Deco/Steampunk/golden age of cinema/WW2 vibe! Definitely laid the groundwork for Iron Man imo

I think they will release today's box office numbers for BvS after the stock market closes too

 

[Kanon]

They just put up Zootopia's Monday gross (1.4M).

Link.

BvS will be up soon. I'm like a goalie in a shootout right now.

 

[Poni_Boy]

As much as I despised BVS I always think back to the summer blockbuster season of '82 and any cinemagoers then that, say, came out of BLADE RUNNER or THE THING loving them only to realise that the critical and commercial reception was underwhelming to say the least only to be vindicated years later.

I suppose the difference is neither of those movies, despite the money spent on them back in the day, had the kind of expectations this property had hence why many of us are baffled at Snyder, IMO, screwing up a sure thing so easily.

And I applaud directors who try to reimagine a little known property into film form (ala Blade Runner). But when you use iconic characters known the world over it comes with expectations. The box office, at the end of the day, is the sole barometer for success. Cult status is not something a filmmaker strives for.

 

[Mysteryman]

Very envious of home displays[/QUOTE]
I would go for either a Batman/Superman display or a Rocketeer display.
Kudos guys.

 

[Flickster]

Very envious of home display.
I would go for either a Batman/Superman display or a Rocketeer display.
Kudos guys.

Thanks, mate. I'm going to get some frames for the posters (I just received them today). Anyhow, I can't wait until BvS numbers for Monday are posted; I'm hoping that they're higher than the reported 3.1M.

 

[jokesonm3]

Any second now...

 

[DarthSkywalker]

As much as I despised BVS I always think back to the summer blockbuster season of '82 and any cinemagoers then that, say, came out of BLADE RUNNER or THE THING loving them only to realise that the critical and commercial reception was underwhelming to say the least only to be vindicated years later.

I suppose the difference is neither of those movies, despite the money spent on them back in the day, had the kind of expectations this property had hence why many of us are baffled at Snyder, IMO, screwing up a sure thing so easily.

Those films are intelligent. BvS isn't.

 

[Kobra]

It doesn't matter if it is appealing or not, actually no fictional character is appealing per se, it's the stories told about them that make them appealing or not. Superman is not appealing now because they are making ****** Superman movies. Make a good movie, like it has been done before and the character is a sensation. Batman is appealing 'cause (mostly) good stories were told in the Nolan era. Make a Batman & Robin and the appealing is gone, no matter the character.

WHAT MATTERS is how well known is the character: If the character is known to the audiences, then it's just a matter of making a good film, and you will capture a good portion of the attention of the public in no time, regardless of marketing. And Superman and Batman have all that in spades. Make a WILDCats movie, it's a marketing uphill battle. Make a BvS movie, you have everything on the table to feast.

I disagree. I believe there are characters who appeal easily to a larger number of people. I also believe that certain types of movies and tones are more easily accepted than others, regardless of the quality of the movie itself. IM3 was able to make pretty much as much as TDKR, even though the character itself is not as popular as Batman and the movie wasn't critically as well received. It was still able to make a lot of money? Why? Many reasons. One of them is that it had the right ingredients to appeal to the masses. When you have the right ingredients you can get away more easily with not so good content.

Batman Begins had a very popular character in it and was a very good movie and still didn't make that much money. Dredd is a pretty good movie, but didn't really make much money.

This only means that are way more factors that come into play.I know people who dislike the movie wanna do everything they can to sell the idea that the majority didn't like the movie, that's it isn't making over 1B dollars. I strongly believe that's not the reason. There's more to it than the simplistic notions some of you want to sell us.

 

[Kanon]

I disagree. I believe there are characters who appeal easily to a larger number of people. I also believe that certain types of movies and tones are more easily accepted than others, regardless of the quality of the movie itself. IM3 was able to make pretty much as much as TDKR, even though the character itself is not as popular as Batman and the movie wasn't critically as well received. It was still able to make a lot of money? Why? Many reasons. One of them is that it had the right ingredients to appeal to the masses. When you have the right ingredients you can get away more easily with not so good content.

Batman Begins had a very popular character in it and was a very good movie and still didn't make that much money. Dredd is a pretty good movie, but didn't really make much money.

This only means that are way more factors that come into play.I know people who dislike the movie wanna do everything they can to sell the idea that the majority didn't like the movie, that's it isn't making over 1B dollars. I strongly believe that's not the reason. There's more to it than the simplistic notions some of you want to sell us.

Begins had baggage (from B&R) and IM3 came from Avengers. It's the story that makes them appealing or not (like this movie had baggage from MoS). There is nothing appealing about the characters, except the story you tell with them. If they were or are somewhat popular, it's because of stories told sometime.

And Dredd wasn't really that good, had baggage and I can barely remember any remarkable piece of marketing (very much needed, since it's not as well known as Superman/Batman/etc)

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I disagree. I believe there are characters who appeal easily to a larger number of people. I also believe that certain types of movies and tones are more easily accepted than others, regardless of the quality of the movie itself. IM3 was able to make pretty much as much as TDKR, even though the character itself is not as popular as Batman and the movie wasn't critically as well received. It was still able to make a lot of money? Why? Many reasons. One of them is that it had the right ingredients to appeal to the masses. When you have the right ingredients you can get away more easily with not so good content.

Batman Begins had a very popular character in it and was a very good movie and still didn't make that much money. Dredd is a pretty good movie, but didn't really make much money.

This only means that are way more factors that come into play.I know people who dislike the movie wanna do everything they can to sell the idea that the majority didn't like the movie, that's it isn't making over 1B dollars. I strongly believe that's not the reason. There's more to it than the simplistic notions some of you want to sell us.

You do realize that Iron Man defeats your whole argument right? They built good will through films that critics and GA agreed were good. IM2 was a problem, cleared up by the reception to the Avengers.

Batman Begins is actually another example that hurts your argument greatly, because it shows what bad films do to a good franchise. And what a great film like Batman Begins can do to bring it back to life. The multiplier and home media sales showed people were extremely happy with what they got. Then TDK happened.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Begins had baggage (from B&R) and IM3 came from Avengers. It's the story that makes them appealing or not (like this movie had baggage from MoS). There is nothing appealing about the characters, except the story you tell with them. If they were or are somewhat popular, it's because of stories told sometime.

And Dredd wasn't really that good, had baggage and I can barely remember any remarkable piece of marketing (very much needed, since it's not as well known as Superman/Batman/etc)

Let's not get crazy. Dredd was that good.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Wasn't Sucker Punch supposed to be another Blade Runner as well? I remember it clearly.

Snyderchasers: "Y..you'll see, Sucker Punch is poorly received just like Blade Runner. It the future it shall be revered."

Whatever happened to that?

 

[Kanon]

Let's not get crazy. Dredd was that good.

The scope/stakes of the story was quite limited (granted: not necessarily good or bad when talking about quality of the story, but IMO "bad story" when discussing audiences appeal)

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Wasn't Sucker Punch supposed to be another Blade Runner as well? I remember it clearly.

Snyderchasers: "Y..you'll see, Sucker Punch is poorly received just like Blade Runner. It the future it shall be revered."

Whatever happened to that?

Still horrible.

 

[wobbly]

A film opening very big and having huge drops (when there is no competition to boot) is effectively a 'one and done', and not recommended to others, for many who contributed to the big opening or since.

The interest sure as hell was there (Exhibit A: The Opening weekend), but the film did not deliver on the promise and that is showing with rapidly diminishing returns. This isn't rocket science.