BvS Batman V Superman Box Office Prediction - - - - - - Part 15

[Lily Adler]

What is he trying to say?

 

[Gerontophobe]

The Dark Knight: $1,004,558,444
The Dark Knight Rises: $1,084,939,099

Truly, a box office of $1B was just always out of their grasp.

Not to mention that adjusting for inflation Batman (1989) and Superman (1978) each made half a billion just domestically.

 

[Kobra]

The Dark Knight: $1,004,558,444
The Dark Knight Rises: $1,084,939,099

Truly, a box office of $1B was just always out of their grasp.

Yeah...

Let's forget about the fact that we have had several Batman and Superman movies that didn't make much money. Let's forget about the fact that this was sequel to a movie that disappointed a lot of people and didn't make that much at the BO either. Let's forget about the fact that the actor playing Batman isn't nearly as loved and respected as Christian Bale. Let's forget about the fact that Zack Snyder rarely makes crowd pleasing movies. Let's just pretend that all a movie needs to make 1B is to have Batman and Superman in it. Yeah, shocking.

 

[InCali]

Yeah...

Let's forget about the fact that we have had several Batman and Superman movies that didn't make much money. Let's forget about the fact that this was sequel to a movie that disappointed a lot of people and didn't make that much at the BO either. Let's forget about the fact that the actor playing Batman isn't nearly as loved and respected as Christian Bale. Let's forget about the fact that Zack Snyder rarely makes crowd pleasing movies. Let's just pretend that all a movie needs to make 1B is to have Batman and Superman in it. Yeah, shocking.

We've had some (bad) Batman and Superman movies that didn't make much money....not sure about that, but, okay....Good ones easily made bank.

Your whole argument seems to be founded upon the "problems" facing BvS. Some/most of those problems (choosing a director for example) were totally within control of WB.

Most studios would love to have the problems of having a movie with Batman and Superman in it and the idea that it shouldn't have made more than 1B WW is bullish shisteen.

BvS has PROVEN that you can't just have a movie with BM and SM in it and make 1B WW. Great job WB. AND Ben Affleck was NOT the problem with BvS.

EDIT: If WB didn't think BvS wasn't going to go well in excess of 1B WW when they were planning to go forward with it, they wouldn't have sunk the kind of bank they did into its production. They screwed up pure and simple. If ANYONE doesn't see that, they're delusional. My wife has a practice that may or may not be able to help.

 

[Kobra]

We've had some (bad) Batman and Superman movies that didn't make much money....not sure about that, but, okay....Good ones easily made bank.

Your whole argument seems to be founded upon the "problems" facing BvS. Some/most of those problems (choosing a director for example) were totally within control of WB.

Most studios would love to have the problems of having a movie with Batman and Superman in it and the idea that it shouldn't have made more than 1B WW is bullish shisteen.

BvS has PROVEN that you can't just have a movie with BM and SM in it and make 1B WW. Great job WB. AND Ben Affleck was NOT the problem with BvS.

Not sure what you consider a bad movie. Batman Begins didn't make much and had great reviews. Superman Returns isn't exactly considered a bad movie, even though divisive, but ended up losing money. The fact is that we have worst movies than these two that have made a lot more money.

Having Batman and/or Superman in a movie isn't enough to make a lot of money. Even if the movies are good, they aren't guaranteed to make money.

I just pointed out pretty valid reasons to why the results shouldn't be shocking to anyone.

At the end of the day, the movie will still make a profit. Not quite as much as WB would like, but to make money is always better than to lose money, and the fact is that WB has lost money with DC characters in the past. So even though everyone is talking about this as if it was a big tragedy, WB is probably not that concerned.

 

[Wylie Times]

It's only "shocking" for people who aren't very realistic. If you play close attention to the cinematic history of these characters and some other factors, you will see that this movie always had a very high chance of making quite less than 1B. Even if it had been better received critically.

We really gonna make this disingenuous argument again?

This movie was always expected to make well over a $1 billion. WB executives expected it, industry insiders expected it, and fans damn sure expected it and shouted down anyone that argued it might only make that money depending on the quality of the film.

Batman himself grossed a billion with his last two movies, but somehow Batman AND Superman hitting that number was a long shot? When the numbers for the first weekends Box office came in there were LOTS of people in this thread dancing around talking smack about critics being idiots, and saying the movie was gonna cross a billion easy.

 

[Kobra]

We really gonna make this disingenuous argument again?

This movie was always expected to make well over a $1 billion. WB executives expected it, industry insiders expected it, and fans damn sure expected it and shouted down anyone that argued it might only make that money depending on the quality of the film.

Batman himself grossed a billion with his last two movies, but somehow Batman AND Superman hitting that number was a long shot? When the numbers for the first weekends Box office came in there were LOTS of people in this thread dancing around talking smack about critics being idiots, and saying the movie was gonna cross a billion easy.

Yeah, pal, you're just ignoring a bunch of important factors, but i'm not gonna repeat myself . If you can't see why this movie making 1B was never a safe bet, then i don't know what else to tell you.

 

[Erzengel]

We've had articles stating that BvS had to make $925M to make a profit. Regardless if some people didn't think it was or should have been expected, WB sure was betting on it with the amount of marketing it was doing.

 

[Micromind]

Yeah...

Let's forget about the fact that we have had several Batman and Superman movies that didn't make much money. Let's forget about the fact that this was sequel to a movie that disappointed a lot of people and didn't make that much at the BO either. Let's forget about the fact that the actor playing Batman isn't nearly as loved and respected as Christian Bale. Let's forget about the fact that Zack Snyder rarely makes crowd pleasing movies. Let's just pretend that all a movie needs to make 1B is to have Batman and Superman in it. Yeah, shocking.

All this plus the fact that the story that this movie was based on was always going to be divisive.

I mean, Frank Miller's TDKR has Batman that acts out of character and is brutish, thuggish, the Superman is not very heroic either, Snyder took inspiration from that and the death of Superman story (which again was not a good choice as this is only the second movie to feature Cavill as Supes), it's not surprising that general audience did not like it.

The choice of story did not have mass appeal. It was too much "gloomy" and did not have much "fun factor" to do more then 1 billion.

You can make an entertaining, fun movie featuring Superman, Batman and WW, it will make more then 1 billion, but this movie was not fun or entertaining enough.

 

[Wylie Times]

We've had articles stating that BvS had to make $925M to make a profit. Regardless if some people didn't think it was or should have been expected, WB sure was betting on it with the amount of marketing it was doing.

If the film was good and had legs it probably could have hit that $ 1 billion mark. The marketing team did a damn good job, which is part of why the first WBO was so huge (that and the movie being front loaded). What hurt the film more than anything was poor word of mouth. Most people weren't going back for multiple viewings and they weren't recommending the film to their friends.

Everything pointed to WB expecting this film to be part of the billion dollar club, all the trades were saying it'd be a box office juggernaut, it was positioned in such a way that even skeptics felt it wouldn't have any legit competition till Civil War came out. WB just screwed up royally and bet on the wrong creative team.

 

[InCali]

Not sure what you consider a bad movie. Batman Begins didn't make much and had great reviews. Superman Returns isn't exactly considered a bad movie, even though divisive, but ended up losing money. The fact is that we have worst movies than these two that have made a lot more money.

Having Batman and/or Superman in a movie isn't enough to make a lot of money. Even if the movies are good, they aren't guaranteed to make money.

I just pointed out pretty valid reasons to why the results shouldn't be shocking to anyone.

At the end of the day, the movie will still make a profit. Not quite as much as WB would like, but to make money is always better than to lose money, and the fact is that WB has lost money with DC characters in the past. So even though everyone is talking about this as if it was a big tragedy, WB is probably not that concerned.

Y'know, I may have been a little bit harsh and I apologize if I came off wrong or got in a bit of a snit, BUT (and here we go ) BB was my favorite movie of the Nolan trilogy. It was awesome and it's one of those that I can sit down at any time and enjoy. It made money, but more so, it set the stage for what was to come later. TDK was also very, very good and the cinematography was breathtaking. TDKR comes in 3rd place IMO.

BvS did NOT set the stage for JL. I think it damaged the franchise. Not because "I" thought it was bad (I didn't), but because WB misgauged the the general audience.

Yeah, if you put out a movie that people don't like (barring SW), it's probably not going to do 1B WW. The point is that it should have done better. We can talk ad nauseam about how deep a movie is or whether it's "good", but WB wanted more out of this movie; not just for the $$$ of this movie, but as a stage setter.

 

[Micromind]

We've had articles stating that BvS had to make $925M to make a profit. Regardless if some people didn't think it was or should have been expected, WB sure was betting on it with the amount of marketing it was doing.

Then they should have made sure that the story was not gloomy and boring, then their expectations would have made sense, when the story is 180 opposite of that, it was always going to under-perform.

 

[InCali]

All this plus the fact that the story that this movie was based on was always going to be divisive.

I mean, Frank Miller's TDKR has Batman that acts out of character and is brutish, thuggish, the Superman is not very heroic either, Snyder took inspiration from that and the death of Superman story (which again was not a good choice as this is only the second movie to feature Cavill as Supes), it's not surprising that general audience did not like it.

The choice of story did not have mass appeal. It was too much "gloomy" and did not have much "fun factor" to do more then 1 billion.

You can make an entertaining, fun movie featuring Superman, Batman and WW, it will make more then 1 billion, but this movie was not fun or entertaining enough.

TDK was not "fun". It was a good movie and made 1B quite some time ago. Had BvS been anywhere in the same ballpark (as a movie), that "gloomy" BvS movie would have crushed.

 

[Micromind]

TDK was not "fun". It was a good movie and made 1B quite some time ago. Had BvS been anywhere in the same ballpark (as a movie), that "gloomy" BvS movie would have crushed.

Well, I should have added fun or entertaining movie.

TDK was entertaining, it was also very well constructed movie, the story flow, editing was much better, so it cannot be compared to BvS.

Apart from that everyone was interested in Joker Vs Batman, not the same thing as Batman V Superman.

Also, Nolan is miles ahead of Snyder.

 

[Wylie Times]

TDK was not "fun". It was a good movie and made 1B quite some time ago. Had BvS been anywhere in the same ballpark (as a movie), that "gloomy" BvS movie would have crushed.

THANK YOU!!!

The tone of the film had nothing to do with how it was received by audiences. TDK and TDKR weren't anything close to light and fun.

And while they didn't gross $1 billion the Bryan Singer X-men films were both financially successful and critically well received and they're fairly dark and serious in their own right.

 

[Micromind]

THANK YOU!!!

The tone of the film had nothing to do with how it was received by audiences. TDK and TDKR weren't anything close to light and fun.

And while they didn't gross $1 billion the Bryan Singer X-men films were both financially successful and critically well received and they're fairly dark and serious in their own right.

The under performance is due to several factors, not Just one, here's a check list

1. Nolan=/= Snyder (critics also not think highly of Snyder, so it's pointless to compare TDK to BvS)

2. Tone was not fun and entertaining (which limits rewatchability.)

3. Taking inspiration from Frank Miller's TDKR was not a good idea, adding Doomsday (leading to death of the main character) was not a good idea either, especially as Snyder did not fully develop the hero in MoS.

4. Adding the setup to JL movie and adding other heroes was also not a great idea, which lead to incoherent plot.

 

[Micromind]

TDK was not "fun". It was a good movie and made 1B quite some time ago. Had BvS been anywhere in the same ballpark (as a movie), that "gloomy" BvS movie would have crushed.

I don't understand this, how can anyone expect Snyder to raise to level of Nolan just because he is directing a movie that features characters like Batman and Superman ?

It's like expecting Michael Bay to suddenly become as skilled as Whedon if he is given the task of directing a sequel to Avengers movie.

 

[Bats123]

well i thought TDK was fun, i think people forget the nolan trilogy has some quick puns and jokes here and there but yeah overall i guess its not what you would say a "fun" movie really is. Anyway back on topic, i dont think it beats Zootopia. i say it stays at 860 million WW.

 

[brandeezy89]

Not sure what you consider a bad movie. Batman Begins didn't make much and had great reviews. Superman Returns isn't exactly considered a bad movie, even though divisive, but ended up losing money. The fact is that we have worst movies than these two that have made a lot more money.

Having Batman and/or Superman in a movie isn't enough to make a lot of money. Even if the movies are good, they aren't guaranteed to make money.

I just pointed out pretty valid reasons to why the results shouldn't be shocking to anyone.

At the end of the day, the movie will still make a profit. Not quite as much as WB would like, but to make money is always better than to lose money, and the fact is that WB has lost money with DC characters in the past. So even though everyone is talking about this as if it was a big tragedy, WB is probably not that concerned.

This WB makes billions off of DC merch. every year and the DC films is their only real franchise at the moment now that Harry Potter and LOTR are done. I was reading a good article today about this and they said that WB benefits more from an unperformed BO than one where they didn't make the movie at all.

Especially when the two DC releases this year will make more money than half of the BO for all WB films in 2015. It's not like they're Disney pumping out Marvel, Star Wars, Pixar etc.

 

[Micromind]

Singer's movies may not be bright and funny but he knows how to make an entertaining movie that will be well received by the general audience (same with Nolan), in case of Snyder, he just makes the movie he wants to without thinking too much about the general audience, sometimes it works (300, MoS) sometimes it doesn't (Sucker Punch, Watchmen, BvS).

 

[InCali]

Well, I should have added fun or entertaining movie.

TDK was entertaining, it was also very well constructed movie, the story flow, editing was much better, so it cannot be compared to BvS.

Apart from that everyone was interested in Joker Vs Batman, not the same thing as Batman V Superman.

Also, Nolan is miles ahead of Snyder.

Ya think?

And therein, lies much of the problem. I don't think we can expect a director to pull off a Christopher Nolan on a daily basis, but, still, BvS should have done better at the BO and, ultimately, WB is responsible.

 

[InCali]

The under performance is due to several factors, not Just one, here's a check list

1. Nolan=/= Snyder (critics also not think highly of Snyder, so it's pointless to compare TDK to BvS)

2. Tone was not fun and entertaining (which limits rewatchability.)

3. Taking inspiration from Frank Miller's TDKR was not a good idea, adding Doomsday (leading to death of the main character) was not a good idea either, especially as Snyder did not fully develop the hero in MoS.

4. Adding the setup to JL movie and adding other heroes was also not a great idea, which lead to incoherent plot.

We can go through all of the reasons, but the bottom line is that BvS didn't meet BO expectations and put a lot of pressure on WW to hype JL. Given what we know now, I have grave concerns about JL.

 

[InCali]

Singer's movies may not be bright and funny but he knows how to make an entertaining movie that will be well received by the general audience (same with Nolan), in case of Snyder, he just makes the movie he wants to without thinking too much about the general audience, sometimes it works (300, MoS) sometimes it doesn't (Sucker Punch, Watchmen, BvS).

If Singer had done BvS, I can guarantee you that BvS would have done everything WB wanted from that movie (BO and otherwise). Of course I can state that as a fact because I can never be proven wrong t: or right

The first movie I saw from Singer was The Usual Suspects (a very light, fun movie ) and I can tell you that when I walked out of the theater, I had to pick my jaw up off the floor in order to not step on it.

I liked Watchmen, didn't hate Sucker Punch (though I expected more), and thought 300 was interesting. MoS didn't do it for me. BvS was better (obviously) than Sucker Punch, but I think Snyder needs to re-evaluate how he approaches his work. I think the guy has talent, but needs to rethink his general approach.

 

[Mutato]

I was reading a good article today about this and they said that WB benefits more from an unperformed BO than one where they didn't make the movie at all.

That rationalization.

 

[Logan0327]

TDK was not "fun". It was a good movie and made 1B quite some time ago. Had BvS been anywhere in the same ballpark (as a movie), that "gloomy" BvS movie would have crushed.

i felt it was fun because unlike BVS even TDK had fun moments
[YT]1z6o1GIEsQE[/YT]
[YT]iSXL58MPPQc[/YT]
[YT]1zwJp6DmmuE[/YT]
[YT]weRVEsCGnP4[/YT]

not to mention the funny dark humor brought on by the joker