BvS Batman V Superman Box Office Prediction - - - - - - - Part 16

[Kahran Ramsus]

WB/DC should be embarrassed. I just hope that people don't blame this on "lack of interest for DC characters," because that's a load of bunk. This movie's shortcomings in the box office are solely due to the quality (or lack thereof) of the film. Most people think the movie sucks. And a lot of people feel emphatically and passionately about that, because WB dropped the ball on characters that people care about. So that's proof to me that audiences want to like DC movies.

If it was lack of interest, it would have had a poor opening weekend. It did not. It was the massive drops that killed it. It is a classic example of a film that people were interested in and simply didn't like.

 

[Leenie]

If it was lack of interest, it would have had a poor opening weekend. It did not. It was the massive drops that killed it. It is a classic example of a film that people were interested in and simply didn't like.

Absolutely.

 

[StormC]

Yawn.

Why are you even posting in this thread?

 

[Chesterfield]

If you think for one second that WB aren't comparing BvS's BO to other superhero movies like it, then you don't understand how the movie business works.

To them, when compared to Civil War's take, it is embarrassing. Hell, never mind Civil War, Deadpool out grossed it domestically.

This movie was meant to make more than it did. Keep kidding yourself all you like, but by the metric of how Hollywood functions, BvS is a disappointment. It underperformed, and will only have a small profit.

You think for a moment WB are thinking about that $70 mil?

They're not. They're thinking about the $300 million extra this film should have made, and didn't.

Well said.

 

[Chesterfield]

I do séances twice weekly under the name Madame Friskythighs. Why not pop along and I can tell you when you'll next be laid off work with stress?

And, to restate what I would imagine to most would be an extremely obvious point:

BATMAN and SUPERMAN - with a little Wonder Woman thrown in for good measure.

You can deride what I have to say all you like, and it will bother me not a jot, because I know I'm right.

This isn't some random blockbuster movie we're talking about here. It isn't Tom Cruise's latest foray into spycraft, or Michael Bay's latest attempt to lobotomise us all with another Transformers movie.

This is Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice. A movie starring the two greatest superheroes ever conceived, a project hyped beyond all measure for three years, and a flick that is meant to be equal to The Avengers.

All the ret-conning going on about how it should only be compared to Iron Man 2 or similar smaller scale movies in Marvel's output is cloudy ********, because, and here it is for the fourth time:

It's BATMAN and SUPERMAN.

Of course it was supposed to make more money than it did. And of course WB are disappointed when they look across town at all the money Civil War is raking in.

I don't need to be clairvoyant to know that, just a rational human being who isn't desperately ret-conning what this movie should have done business-wise because they don't want to admit that Zack Snyder served up a warmed over turd of a movie.

Remember: Madame Friskythighs. She'll read your palm and make your day!

 

[Pickle-El]

If you think for one second that WB aren't comparing BvS's BO to other superhero movies like it, then you don't understand how the movie business works.

To them, when compared to Civil War's take, it is embarrassing. Hell, never mind Civil War, Deadpool out grossed it domestically.

This movie was meant to make more than it did. Keep kidding yourself all you like, but by the metric of how Hollywood functions, BvS is a disappointment. It underperformed, and will only have a small profit.

You think for a moment WB are thinking about that $70 mil?

They're not. They're thinking about the $300 million extra this film should have made, and didn't.

Do you enjoy going in circles? Is it deliberate? You've been on this since April. BvS made what it made...you can't yell about it anymore, we all know. It's not a secret that is didn't make as much as Avengers. Congratulations to you for getting the results you continuously celebrate in this thread. I just ask you once question about that...

You do know what redundant means right? I think everyone heard you the last 20 times.

 

[The Joker]

People wouldn't keep bringing it up if others were not in denial about the obvious. Especially when you see people try and spin 70 million profit as a success story for a franchise like this.

 

[Pickle-El]

It is in Hollywood with major tentpoles, and in any industry where you invest 800M to only make 70

I bet you wouldn't be talking about success if you go to the black jack table with 800, risk it all, and walk away with 870.


They earn that because movies return a profit of more than 70M. With that margin of profit, you can only pay a small group of people that money, while also maintaining the studio infraestructure.

Oh really. Do go on about the specifics of what BvS will ultimately earn. This doesn't take into account, deflated promotional tie-ins reducing Global P&A, toy sales and licensing. Estimated 150-160 in profit when you update for 870 million ww gross.

Read this part at least once for comprehension purposes:

this is before any merchandising is taken into consideration. Three years ago, The Licensing Letter weighed global retails sales for Batman and Superman at $771M combined.

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


WB's grubby little hands wanted more, of course. But, they aren't hurting. Batman and Superman make money in a variety of different ways. And in a year when these characters are in the spotlight, merchandising goes through the roof.

 

[Pickle-El]

For reference, this is a bomb...and to be honest, it wasn't that bad of write-off. To compare, John Carter;

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/disney-film-boss-quits-after-200m-john-carter-flop-1.1284276

But "John Carter" made only $269 million at box offices worldwide while "Avatar" took in $2.8 billion. After splits with theater owners and marketing expenses, Disney has said "John Carter" would cause a studio-wide loss of $80 million to $120 million in the January-March quarter.

Here you go; Have fun reading about bombs compared that films that just underpeformed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_box_office_bombs#Biggest_box_office_bombs

 

[Pickle-El]

People wouldn't keep bringing it up if others were not in denial about the obvious. Especially when you see people try and spin 70 million profit as a success story for a franchise like this.

It's not a huge success story. It's not a bomb. It's an under-performing blockbuster that will still turn a decent profit. It's boring to leave it at that though, so we come here EVERY DAY and repeat the same old "Couldn't even beat ****** lol" posts...probably a 15 year old with nothing going on. I guess it's to be expected.

 

[StormC]

God forbid people discuss a movie's box office in its box office thread.

 

[FunkMiller]

Do you enjoy going in circles? Is it deliberate? You've been on this since April. BvS made what it made...you can't yell about it anymore, we all know. It's not a secret that is didn't make as much as Avengers. Congratulations to you for getting the results you continuously celebrate in this thread. I just ask you once question about that...

You do know what redundant means right? I think everyone heard you the last 20 times.

I'm not particularly 'down' with the young and happening folk, but I'm led to believe that posting the following image may adequately describe your feelings regarding this topic, and the manner of your response to my accurate and ever so brilliant summing up of how disappointing BvS was at the box office:

 

[Pickle-El]

 

[InCali]

Y'all are killin' me.....

 

[Limonade]

Then what's the point of doing a big budget tent pole movie at all for only $70M?

They might as well and try and do a buddy cop movie and make at least twice that much back especially with a lower budget.

I understand what you're saying that $70M is a lot of money but in terms of the time and effort put into BvS, it just seems underwhelming.

Ohmahgurd. I didn't even think about that. You get a at great rebuttals.

 

[InCali]

Your claim to have insight into the minds and thoughts of others is as astonishing as it is nonsensical.

But let's allow that your pretense at seeing into others' minds is correct, and the WB execs are in fact disappointed by BvS' paltry $70M profit (without ancillaries). They're super-bummed out that they only have to split $70M, instead of the $300M it "should have made" (in some platonic conception of a world in which events transpire according to what "should" happen). Let's say that bizarro scenario is in fact wholly correct and accurate.

So, because multi-millionaires with 6 and 7-figure salaries are disappointed that they only have $70M to split up, that means that, to them, BvS is an "embarrassment" and a "failure". Okay.

Remind me again why this is important to audiences or fans? Explain why the belly-aching of unbelievably wealthy, privileged multi-millionaires -- who are no doubt weeping as they oversee the laying down of fresh carpet on their yacht -- is in any way significant? Doubtless your unclouded clairvoyance into their thoughts and emotions will help you in formulating a cogent and persuasive response.

I don't think you sound like a pacifist (per your Avi) or a very good business person (which I'm not either). If you leave 100s of millions of dollars on the table, I think that's a bad thing.

Of course you take your wins, losses, and draws, but you have to make big $$$ on your cream or else someone else is going to have a bigger stack to play with. Take SW:TFA for example. They seem to have about the same budget. If TFA had brought in less than 900M WW, would Disney be dancing in their boots? These were 2 cream (SW obviously heavier cream) franchises that performed in radically different directions and there are long term implications going forward because 1 was well received and 1 was not. Ditto for CW. This is not good positioning for WB.

The Rogue 1 trailer looks really, really intriguing. Someone knows what they're doing........

 

[Flint Marko]

Just so we can hopefully end this ridiculous discussion about whether or not BvS was a financial disappointment:

The Dark Knight (2008):
Budget: $185 million
Box Office: $1.005 billion

The Dark Knight Rises (2012):
Budget: $230 million
Box Office: $1.085 billion

Batman v Superman (2016):
Budget: $250 million (this doesn't include the hundreds of millions they poured into marketing, undoubtedly more than the prior Batman films)
Box Office: $869.8 million

Now I'm no business major but from what I do know, you don't spend more money to make less money.
We can debate all day about just how much of a dud this was, but the fact is that it was a critical and financial dud.

 

[samsnee]

Just so we can hopefully end this ridiculous discussion about whether or not BvS was a financial disappointment:

The Dark Knight (2008):
Budget: $185 million
Box Office: $1.005 billion

The Dark Knight Rises (2012):
Budget: $230 million
Box Office: $1.085 billion

Batman v Superman (2016):
Budget: $250 million (this doesn't include the hundreds of millions they poured into marketing, undoubtedly more than the prior Batman films)
Box Office: $869.8 million

Now I'm no business major but from what I do know, you don't spend more money to make less money.
We can debate all day about just how much of a dud this was, but the fact is that it was a critical and financial dud.

I've used this analogy before.

I have a Man of Steel bake sale. I make 10 cookies and sell all 10.

The next day I have another bake sale where I make Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman cookies. This time I make 20 cookies but only sell 15. So I guess I'm successful because I sold more cookies than the day before?

 

[Stark Bauer]

$800M isn't the break even point. We don't know what the break even point is. Estimates say it is between $800M to as high as $925M. That last number is according to Deadline.

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

 

[Stark Bauer]

BvS will most likely end up with $329M DOM.

 

[Mutato]

There is nothing "disappointing" about any of this for the unbelievably wealthy people profiting from the enormous success of this film. The doomsaying posts about how "embarrassing" a $70 MILLION PROFIT is are out of touch with reality.

Oops
'Batman v. Superman' Fallout: Warner Bros. Shakes Up Executive Roles

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/batman-v-superman-fallout-warner-895174

 

[samsnee]

Wow I guess that $70 million profit now needs to be split with 2 more people.

 

[GreenKToo]

Lol. BvS was not a bomb, a disappointment yes, but a bomb? Nope. You cant make a profit, no matter how small, and be a bomb.

That said, 300 mill + was left on the table so a shakeup is not surprising.

 

[Reek]

lol some of you snails really need the ****ing ban hammer.

 

[aNarcHy2day]

I personally have always considered a truly economically successful movie to earn back it's production budget post it's break-even point. So, for BvS, for me it would be 800 (I do think that estimate is a bit inflated, though)+250mil= 1.05billion.

Hence 870mil is disappointing.