BvS Batman V Superman Box Office Prediction - Part 2

[The Shape]

I agree that this film needs to be better than MOS and that they should be aiming to deliver a film that is of the highest quality possible, but suggesting that it needs a RT score in the high 80s or low 90s to properly "correct the course" is pretty absurd -- especially when RT scores are a non-factor for so many people (and the GA) and ultimately don't mean a whole lot.


Here's hoping it gets up there, though.

 

[jmc]

I agree that this film needs to be better than MOS and that they should be aiming to deliver a film that is of the highest quality possible, but suggesting that it needs a RT score in the high 80s or low 90s to properly "correct the course" is pretty absurd -- especially when RT scores are a non-factor for so many people (and the GA) and ultimately don't mean a whole lot.


Here's hoping it gets up there, though.

The series has to show it deliver high level quality films otherwise its audience will always be limited.

 

[The Shape]

The series has to show it deliver high level quality films otherwise its audience will always be limited.

Of course the film should be able to show that it is high quality entertainment, but the millions of people who will see the film have widely varying expectations and determinations of what is or isn't "high quality" entertainment. And again, you're speaking as if a film's RT score is the measure by which audiences judge a film, or an accurate measure of a franchise's potential to reach audiences.

Going by your logic, Jurassic World's 71% RT score should have limited its audience, or will limit its audience in the future -- something we know isn't true. Or that since Avengers: AOU had a 75% RT score, there will now be a significant drop-off in box office for future Avengers/Marvel films.

Alternatively, we have a film like The Revanent with an 82% RT score (or "low 80s" as you'd call it) that is nominated for a slew of Oscars and has been a pretty big box office success for a film of its kind.

Also, when you focus so much on the actual score numbers of 75% vs 82% vs 92%, you lose sight of what the scores themselves actually mean. While MOS's score of 56% shows that reviews were clearly mixed, it still shows that there were more positive reviews than reviews that skewed negative (168 vs 128). When you get into the 70s like with Jurassic World, that shows that there were an even greater majority of postive reviews over negative ones (198 vs 80). The Revanent having a score in the low 80s doesn't look amazing, but it still had 207 positive reviews over 45 negative reviews which is really great.

Of course, the ideal scenario would be for BvS to have a super high score like TDK or Star Wars. But it's important to realize that saying that a score must be nearly unanimously praised by critics in order for it to impact audiences positively is certainly asking for a lot, and certainly not always true.

 

[jokesonm3]

At the end of the day, as long as they're good, enjoyable, popcorn films that you can take the whole family to enjoy and have a good time then that is what i consider to be success for BvS.

 

[Herolee10]

Personally, I'm hoping that BvS can do better than the likes of Bay's Transformers's films where the only thing that it's good at is making money.

 

[jokesonm3]

Thing about Bay's Transformers is that they were already getting worse RT wise from a mixed score, if that happened for the DCEU then i'd be worried.

A certified fresh score is what im hoping for, the rest for me is just an extra helping of Gravy to the meal.

 

[jmc]

Of course the film should be able to show that it is high quality entertainment, but the millions of people who will see the film have widely varying expectations and determinations of what is or isn't "high quality" entertainment. And again, you're speaking as if a film's RT score is the measure by which audiences judge a film, or an accurate measure of a franchise's potential to reach audiences.

Going by your logic, Jurassic World's 71% RT score should have limited its audience, or will limit its audience in the future -- something we know isn't true. Or that since Avengers: AOU had a 75% RT score, there will now be a significant drop-off in box office for future Avengers/Marvel films.

Alternatively, we have a film like The Revanent with an 82% RT score (or "low 80s" as you'd call it) that is nominated for a slew of Oscars and has been a pretty big box office success for a film of its kind.

Also, when you focus so much on the actual score numbers of 75% vs 82% vs 92%, you lose sight of what the scores themselves actually mean. While MOS's score of 56% shows that reviews were clearly mixed, it still shows that there were more positive reviews than reviews that skewed negative (168 vs 128). When you get into the 70s like with Jurassic World, that shows that there were an even greater majority of postive reviews over negative ones (198 vs 80). The Revanent having a score in the low 80s doesn't look amazing, but it still had 207 positive reviews over 45 negative reviews which is really great.

Of course, the ideal scenario would be for BvS to have a super high score like TDK or Star Wars. But it's important to realize that saying that a score must be nearly unanimously praised by critics in order for it to impact audiences positively is certainly asking for a lot, and certainly not always true.

Jurassic World was frankly an anomaly and everyone knows it. In this case though it is important because we already have two movies in development in SS and WW and a top quality movie will make it easier to sell those next two films. The momentum gets sucked out if reviews aren't widely praised for this film. There are already people waiting to crap on BvS and wanting it to suck, just like the GL situation back in 2010 BvS needs to shut those people up and get the audience to invest in these characters and this universe. So 60's isn't good enough, even 70's isn't good enough, this film needs to be a critical success across the board. Is that asking a lot? Yes, but that's the standard we should want.

 

[jokesonm3]

Jurassic World was frankly an anomaly and everyone knows it. In this case though it is important because we already have two movies in development in SS and WW and a top quality movie will make it easier to sell those next two films. The momentum gets sucked out if reviews aren't widely praised for this film. There are already people waiting to crap on BvS and wanting it to suck, just like the GL situation back in 2010 BvS needs to shut those people up and get the audience to invest in these characters and this universe. So 60's isn't good enough, even 70's isn't good enough, this film needs to be a critical success across the board. Is that asking a lot? Yes, but that's the standard we should want.

Hopefully im pegging it at the high 80's - low 90's range.

But realistically im pegging it at the mid 70's range and above.

Not every critics okay with Snyder no matter what he does, As Marvin pointed out a couple of weeks ago, take the case of Joanna Robinson and remember that she's a top reviewer on Rotten Tomatoes.

This is the kind of Snyder biasism were dealing with here.

 

[jmc]

Hopefully im pegging it at the high 80's - low 90's range.

But realistically im pegging it at the mid 70's range and above.

Not every critics okay with Snyder no matter what he does, As Marvin pointed out a couple of weeks ago, take the case of Joanna Robinson and remember that she's a top reviewer on Rotten Tomatoes.

This is the kind of Snyder biasism were dealing with here.

I'm sorry, but there is not a Snyder bias. This is a completely made up thing people have come up with as to explain why his films aren't reviewed better instead of accepting that maybe he's the reason for his films getting a mixed response.

 

[jokesonm3]

I'm sorry, but there is not a Snyder bias. This is a completely made up thing people have come up with as to explain why his films aren't reviewed better instead of accepting that maybe he's the reason for his films getting a mixed response.

Even with her tweet claiming otherwise?

HAVE I MENTIONED THAT I HATE ZACK SNYDER AND REFUSE TO GIVE HIM CREDIT EVER? No? Well. Let this tweet be a reminder to you.

https://***********/jowrotethis/status/293798732313526274

 

[jmc]

What, you think the majority of critics are like that?

 

[jokesonm3]

What, you think the majority of critics are like that?

Thankfully no, but there is a small number of em.

 

[jmc]

In other words, not enough for scores to be skewed.

 

[Black Narcissus]

70% is good enough for me.

My own liking of the film is another thing.

 

[jokesonm3]

In other words, not enough for scores to be skewed.

A small number yes but enough online fanboy site numbers to nearly prevent it from getting that high 80's low 90's score.

How rotten tomatoes even let's fanboy review sites give a score for a major blockbuster film is beyond me.

 

[rockandrollsoul]

What, you think the majority of critics are like that?

Who knows? This is confirmation that bias exists, though. Whether it's one or many is anyone's guess. With how pretentious some of these critics are, though, it wouldn't surprise me if there were a lot who feel that way.

 

[jmc]

Who knows? This is confirmation that bias exists, though. Whether it's one or many is anyone's guess. With how pretentious some of these critics are, though, it wouldn't surprise me if there were a lot who feel that way.

There is no evidence that there is a collective group looking to purposely play down his talents as a director. The only people who believe there is a bias are Snyder's fans who refuse to acknowledge that the mix response Snyder has always gotten may in fact come down to the director's talents himself.

 

[Tec15]

Pretty much. If MoS had done the same box office numbers, but was 85+ on RT and broadly judged a really strong movie? Even the WB execs would have largely been happy.

Really, the worrisome thing, from their perspective, wasn't the WW gross. It was the legs, or lack thereof. A sharp drop off from a strong opening weekend can mean various things, but one of them is "world of mouth cut you off at the knee". Combine that with the bad reviews, and they have to seriously consider that the movie only made as much as it did on strong marketing getting people there on opening night.

Oh? You mean the same legs displayed by Iron Man 3 and Age of Ultron? Disney better really watch out then for their next few movies and hop the previously bad WOM doesn't screw them.

 

[Tec15]

Not going to happen. No prior DC movie of any kind has even come close to a billion international. A 50% increase over the highest international gross on a DC movie ever wouldn't even do it.

What a reductive argument. Like saying since the first Iron Man movie failed to clear $300 million internationally, no Marvel movie will make more than that in the future. Doesn't even take into account things like the massive growth of the internationally box office even in the last few years, 3D, increased ticket prices, etc.

 

[kguillou]

This is going to sound very ignorant and close minded but as much as I am yearning for this film to be successful critically and financially,theres a small part of me thag kind of hopes it doesnt become a MEGA success like the Avengers movies. The reason being is because I feel like the moment that happens with franchises you start to see the studio meddling with the artisitic and creative vision in the future movies. We've seen this happen time and again where the director's creative vision and tone is co-opted because "the studio knows best" and they wanna steer their golden goose. We saw it when Batman 1989 became a mega success and Burton was neutured for the sequel. We saw huge intereference with Sam Raimi and Spiderman 3. We saw it with Age of Ultron, it was so bad it wore Joss Whedon out and he left.

I am an unabashed Snyder fan, i love how he crafts his films and I like the darker, more serious nature he's steering BvS in and hopefully Justice League. If BvS ends up making more than 1.6 billion and becomes a worldwide phenomenon I kinda fear the studio is gonna then interfer with his vision for Justice League and maybe the vision/tone of the DC films going forward. To make the films more "family/kid friendly." The last thing I want is for the DC films to become "MCU 2.0." i like that we now have a darker, more visceral alternative to the lighter family friendly Marvel films ( and I love the Marvel films btw).

Just some of my honest feelings. I absolutely want this movie to make more than TDK movies made but Im hoping Snyder's vision remains in tact regardless of the film's success.

 

[jokesonm3]

Warner Bros has had mega successes before in the form of the Harry Potter franchise and the Hobbit films making billions and yet both rowling and Jackson still kept their creative ideas in tact from studio hands unlike Disney and AOU.

There's a reason that Warner Bros is considered to be the most Director friendly studio in the planet and that big filmmakers like Nolan and Affleck choose to work with them.

 

[Baneis8feettall]

This is going to sound very ignorant and close minded but as much as I am yearning for this film to be successful critically and financially,theres a small part of me thag kind of hopes it doesnt become a MEGA success like the Avengers movies. The reason being is because I feel like the moment that happens with franchises you start to see the studio meddling with the artisitic and creative vision in the future movies. We've seen this happen time and again where the director's creative vision and tone is co-opted because "the studio knows best" and they wanna steer their golden goose. We saw it when Batman 1989 became a mega success and Burton was neutured for the sequel. We saw huge intereference with Sam Raimi and Spiderman 3. We saw it with Age of Ultron, it was so bad it wore Joss Whedon out and he left.

I am an unabashed Snyder fan, i love how he crafts his films and I like the darker, more serious nature he's steering BvS in and hopefully Justice League. If BvS ends up making more than 1.6 billion and becomes a worldwide phenomenon I kinda fear the studio is gonna then interfer with his vision for Justice League and maybe the vision/tone of the DC films going forward. To make the films more "family/kid friendly." The last thing I want is for the DC films to become "MCU 2.0." i like that we now have a darker, more visceral alternative to the lighter family friendly Marvel films ( and I love the Marvel films btw).

Just some of my honest feelings. I absolutely want this movie to make more than TDK movies made but Im hoping Snyder's vision remains in tact regardless of the film's success.

Actually if this works out well, they would give more freedom to Zach and darker & serious DC movies.

They let Nolan do whatever he wants after Batman Begins success.

If AOU was a disappointment that's Whedon's fault, people got tired of his humor in almost every second. Marvel movies turned into more Avengers-lite funny movies like except Captain America. That's the impact of Whedon.

I think WB has a good vision for future with DC. Everything they have shown seems on point and products of a vision. They are aware DC material is better for darker & edgier stuff that sells too.

Batman alone would keep DCEU away from being Marvel 2.0. Character sells best when it's darker & edgier and he is DC's money maker.

 

[jokesonm3]

Nolan, Snyder, Affleck, Jackson, all these filmmakers were given freedom in making their films.

Plus Rovan did say that as oppose to the Marvel formula, DCEU filmmakers get thier own level of creative freedom.

 

[False Prophet]

Creative freedom is one thing I'm not worried about with WB films.

 

[metaphysician]

I agree that this film needs to be better than MOS and that they should be aiming to deliver a film that is of the highest quality possible, but suggesting that it needs a RT score in the high 80s or low 90s to properly "correct the course" is pretty absurd -- especially when RT scores are a non-factor for so many people (and the GA) and ultimately don't mean a whole lot.

Here's hoping it gets up there, though.

Its not so much that the RT score is the thing it needs. Rather, it needs *quality*. . . and the level of quality it needs to course-correct the franchise, would almost certainly correlate with the kind of reviewer response that would produce a RT 85+.

I think a lot of people get the utility of RT scores backwards. The scores themselves don't particularly matter, its what they *measure* that matters.