BvS Batman V Superman Box Office Prediction

[Marvin]

CBM to hit 1B:

The Dark Knight- Arguably the best CBM of all time. Heath Ledger's death.
The Avengers- 6 year build up. Payoff of Marvel cinematic universe. Revolutionary.
The Dark Knight Rises- Sequel to best CBM of all time. Excellent marketing, conclusion to Nolan's trilogy.
Iron Man 3- Avengers spinoff to highest grossing CBM of all time, Iron Man was on top of the world. RDJ.

Why is 1B considered a "lock" just because it's Batman and Superman. This isn't Nolan's Batman, this is Snyder's. I don't see that justifying this movie joining the company of what 4 other movies have only been able to accomplish. The Avengers 2 is the only movie worthy and deserving of being a lock for 1B as far as I'm concerned. I'm not a Marvel fanboy, I'm just trying to be grounded. As far as a lock, I'd say this movie is at 750M. No, that doesn't mean I think this movie will make 750M WW, I'm saying it definitely will not make less than that. I'm predicting around 850-900M.

People waited years to see Superman on the big screen throw a punch and have a real fight scene. That didn't bring in a billion, even with one of the most visually talented directors money can buy. It's more than just bringing them together on screen, it's what they do with them. I have zero confidence in Snyder after MOS. I fear he's going to replicate that same feeling in this movie for me.

That's great that people waited years to see him 'throw a punch'! Just how many more people is that than the people that simply waited to see him on screen? Superman Returns wass superman's big return to the big screen and it makes like 400mill but a superman movie in which he throws a punch and all of a sudden you are given grounds to assert that it was 'supposed' to do a whole lot more? And then you patronize Synder visual talents(when convenient of course but belittle him on the opposite occasion of sequel potential). Singer made his superman movie with the superman brand and the advantage of actually being the 20 year return and it truly 'under performed'. Synder came in and used the same brand but without the advantage of being the 20 year return but rather the follow up to something young people really think is lamer than the rest of the bunch and did great numbers(especially domestically)? MOS opened big domestically and it went on to do great numbers domestically. All that with real competition to boot. For more of an excuse than any domestic performer this year anyways.

Till then, I get that you and yours didn't like MOS but it landed and it landed very solidly. I get(assume) that you and yours probably don't like the transformers films and they keep over performing in this regard. Wanna figure why that is? It usually has something to do with how the GA works. Also, when something has Alist momentum it's no longer a matter of 'Snyder/Bay hasn't earned my trust yet'.

Further, I have a major problem with your categorizing. For example, instead of maybe listing the 4 cbm that have hit a billion and how hard it seemingly is for them to do so, hows about we instead list the amount of films that have hit a billion and look at this next installment in that regard?

I also think one needs to start appreciating just what a zeitgeist is. I keep coming back to just how much of this same rhetoric was thrown at Avengers prior to going in. People(and analysts) had it doing less than TDK numbers because the mcu films weren't actually all that big(or all that good imo) leading in, though history has kinda been re-written. The film broke records even before the more tangible word of mouth gave it the legs. That wasn't simply cause Whedon made the greatest film ever, alot of that had to do with film goer's interest in being a part of an event. Just how much less would that film have made if it wasn't as good? Less than a billion? That didn't seem to stop IM3....a film that wasn't as good a avengers. The point is that of zeitgeist and momentum.

And yes, the last two batman films have hit a billion without 3D, this is the next film to have his name in the title. Take that with whatever grain of salt you prefer and spread it out over the established foreign market for that character. Just what was MOS' foreign market share potential going in? Pay attention to how much ground had to be covered between the subsequent TDKT releases in the foreign markets. Pay attention to what the MCU has done in this same regard. The same thing will most likely happen with the new superman brand and when it does...the WW advantage the mcu films had(See Cap2) will decline. That is, had MOS done as well internationally as the follow ups to the Avengers we'd be looking at a different WW figure today. How you do this is by establishing something for those markets to get behind as TF and the MCU films have done.

Lastly, You're right, Snyder isn't Nolan(in branding), just because TDK made a billion that doesn't automatically mean Snyders stand alone batman film would stand to make as much. Just how much would Snyder's stand alone batman film make today? Whilst you think about that, think about the fact that Snyder isn't making his stand alone batman film.
Think of it this way. If snyder made an Ironman film right now, it may not do as well as the genius that was Shane Blacks film(for arguments sake). But what would happen if right now Snyder made a film starring Ironman and The Hulk(with the promise of a Hulk Buster fight and bro-science) in an established continuity? Would all this Snyder sucks crap even matter or would the actual momentum of the event shine through the discussion? I would argue the latter and call it a day.

I have never felt more certain that 1 billion a lock for a film than I have this(and a few others obviously). I for one feel I'm one of the few that is contextualizing the MOS' numbers properly given it's actual circumstance. A film does great and better than most other films that supposedly do great and it's endlessly under played due to some fickle proclamation that it was supposed to do more. I think the film would have to seriously suck for it to not strive off of the event alone(Wonder Woman debut at that), and whether fanboys want to admit it or not, even MOS didn't suck as bad as this film would need to.

 

[Lord]

I also think one needs to start appreciating just what a zeitgeist is. I keep coming back to just how much of this same rhetoric was thrown at Avengers prior to going in. People(and analysts) had it doing less than TDK numbers because the mcu films weren't actually all that big(or all that good imo) leading in, though history has kinda been re-written. The film broke records even before the more tangible word of mouth gave it the legs. That wasn't simply cause Whedon made the greatest film ever, alot of that had to do with film goer's interest in being a part of an event. Just how much less would that film have made if it wasn't as good? Less than a billion? That didn't seem to stop IM3....a film that wasn't as good a avengers. The point is that of zeitgeist and momentum.

Iron Man 3 was better than The Avengers

 

[Joeyjojo72]

Ah, opinions. Everybody's got one.

 

[Frontier]

No clue on an accurate prediction.

My hope?

$250 million opening weekend.

Once that would have been a pipe dream, but if Avengers can do $207 mil in a weekend, than certainly having the Bats, Supes and WW in a film together can meet or surpass such, right?

 

[metaphysician]

No clue on an accurate prediction.

My hope?

$250 million opening weekend.

Once that would have been a pipe dream, but if Avengers can do $207 mil in a weekend, than certainly having the Bats, Supes and WW in a film together can meet or surpass such, right?

Not really, given that Avengers had to basically saturate the movie theater capacity in order to hit that high.

 

[Flint Marko]

No clue on an accurate prediction.

My hope?

$250 million opening weekend.

Once that would have been a pipe dream, but if Avengers can do $207 mil in a weekend, than certainly having the Bats, Supes and WW in a film together can meet or surpass such, right?

Hate to rain on your parade but a movie won't have a $250 million opening anytime soon. I'd be shocked if BVS could even touch 200. The avengers was a perfect storm of hype and a 6 year build up; even with top notch marketing I doubt it'd have the momentum to pull it on through. TDKR was the only superhero movie in recent memory that had a shot, due to having a lot of hype and momentum behind it as well. I also think a 3 year gap between MoS and BvS could potentially hurt the film, but that's just conjecture on my part.
That being said I think it's possible for this movie to break a billon but at this points far from a sure thing.

 

[JOE]

That's great that people waited years to see him 'throw a punch'! Just how many more people is that than the people that simply waited to see him on screen? Superman Returns wass superman's big return to the big screen and it makes like 400mill but a superman movie in which he throws a punch and all of a sudden you are given grounds to assert that it was 'supposed' to do a whole lot more? And then you patronize Synder visual talents(when convenient of course but belittle him on the opposite occasion of sequel potential). Singer made his superman movie with the superman brand and the advantage of actually being the 20 year return and it truly 'under performed'. Synder came in and used the same brand but without the advantage of being the 20 year return but rather the follow up to something young people really think is lamer than the rest of the bunch and did great numbers(especially domestically)? MOS opened big domestically and it went on to do great numbers domestically. All that with real competition to boot. For more of an excuse than any domestic performer this year anyways.

Till then, I get that you and yours didn't like MOS but it landed and it landed very solidly. I get(assume) that you and yours probably don't like the transformers films and they keep over performing in this regard. Wanna figure why that is? It usually has something to do with how the GA works. Also, when something has Alist momentum it's no longer a matter of 'Snyder/Bay hasn't earned my trust yet'.

Further, I have a major problem with your categorizing. For example, instead of maybe listing the 4 cbm that have hit a billion and how hard it seemingly is for them to do so, hows about we instead list the amount of films that have hit a billion and look at this next installment in that regard?

I also think one needs to start appreciating just what a zeitgeist is. I keep coming back to just how much of this same rhetoric was thrown at Avengers prior to going in. People(and analysts) had it doing less than TDK numbers because the mcu films weren't actually all that big(or all that good imo) leading in, though history has kinda been re-written. The film broke records even before the more tangible word of mouth gave it the legs. That wasn't simply cause Whedon made the greatest film ever, alot of that had to do with film goer's interest in being a part of an event. Just how much less would that film have made if it wasn't as good? Less than a billion? That didn't seem to stop IM3....a film that wasn't as good a avengers. The point is that of zeitgeist and momentum.

And yes, the last two batman films have hit a billion without 3D, this is the next film to have his name in the title. Take that with whatever grain of salt you prefer and spread it out over the established foreign market for that character. Just what was MOS' foreign market share potential going in? Pay attention to how much ground had to be covered between the subsequent TDKT releases in the foreign markets. Pay attention to what the MCU has done in this same regard. The same thing will most likely happen with the new superman brand and when it does...the WW advantage the mcu films had(See Cap2) will decline. That is, had MOS done as well internationally as the follow ups to the Avengers we'd be looking at a different WW figure today. How you do this is by establishing something for those markets to get behind as TF and the MCU films have done.

Lastly, You're right, Snyder isn't Nolan(in branding), just because TDK made a billion that doesn't automatically mean Snyders stand alone batman film would stand to make as much. Just how much would Snyder's stand alone batman film make today? Whilst you think about that, think about the fact that Snyder isn't making his stand alone batman film.
Think of it this way. If snyder made an Ironman film right now, it may not do as well as the genius that was Shane Blacks film(for arguments sake). But what would happen if right now Snyder made a film starring Ironman and The Hulk(with the promise of a Hulk Buster fight and bro-science) in an established continuity? Would all this Snyder sucks crap even matter or would the actual momentum of the event shine through the discussion? I would argue the latter and call it a day.

I have never felt more certain that 1 billion a lock for a film than I have this(and a few others obviously). I for one feel I'm one of the few that is contextualizing the MOS' numbers properly given it's actual circumstance. A film does great and better than most other films that supposedly do great and it's endlessly under played due to some fickle proclamation that it was supposed to do more. I think the film would have to seriously suck for it to not strive off of the event alone(Wonder Woman debut at that), and whether fanboys want to admit it or not, even MOS didn't suck as bad as this film would need to.

A major problem? It's relative to what we're talking about? Why compare apples with oranges? There's enough CBM out there for it to pull weight. Those 4 CBM stand out and for a good reason, that's why they're in their own class (as far as box office goes).

"had it doing less than TDK numbers because the mcu films weren't actually all that big(or all that good imo) leading in" You mean the TWO movies that were out at the time? One being the mediocre "Incredible Hulk" and the other being "Iron-Man" which happens to be one of the MCU's strongest films. Alright.

I agree all about momentum for IM3. I clearly stated in my previous post how Iron-Man was on top of the world at the time. Don't really know why you're trying to argue something I've already stated?

Remember when they use Nolan's name in their MOS marketing? That was fun. I don't recall Nolan getting any heat for the movie, it all goes on Snyder's plate and Nolan's name remains untouched.

Iron-Man and the Hulk are nowhere near as popular as Superman and Batman so the argument isn't really fair, however I see your point. Do I agree with it? No. The MCU's success is based off their growth of their characters. They all had their time in the spotlight before joining hands in the ultimate spotlight. It's unknown how well BVS will do, I just find they're lacking that chemistry to be put on screen together already. Especially without an established Batman.

So you're saying you feel as if BVS is a tighter lock for 1B than AOU? Or is AOU included in your (and a few others obviously)?

 

[Marvin]

A major problem? It's relative to what we're talking about? Why compare apples with oranges? There's enough CBM out there for it to pull weight. Those 4 CBM stand out and for a good reason, that's why they're in their own class (as far as box office goes).

I'm not asking you to how much a musical will make than asking you to compare it to the (musical)standard as those types of film obviously have a pretty fixed market. CBM's aren't some fixed genre where they all tend to make the same amount, they have a massive and broad audience, no doubt due to how transcendent the genre actual is, and they should be seen as any other film when it comes to potential.

If I ask you how much a spy film will stand to make, one that stars Will Smith and is directed by Speilberg or even James Cameron, are you going to run up the list of spy films that mare than 500million(none of which being in 3D mind you) or are you going to look at things like say: Smiths's averages, Cameron/Speilberg's averages, general and foreign market growth, the popularity of the property being adapted, 3D inflation(something not all cbms had)... My point is, yes I get how cbm's are relevant but film itself is more relevant. And the simple fact of the matter is there are alot of films, plenty that had even less going for them than "Batman vs Superman with Wonderwoman as a sequel" that have made a billion so perhaps when you give us a list of how many films have made a billion it might be more insightful to not simply look at four cbms but rather the 20 or so films that have proven how attainable that number is for a big film.

"had it doing less than TDK numbers because the mcu films weren't actually all that big(or all that good imo) leading in" You mean the TWO movies that were out at the time? One being the mediocre "Incredible Hulk" and the other being "Iron-Man" which happens to be one of the MCU's strongest films. Alright.

I'm confused, you seem to be under the impression that there were only 2 MCU films prior to Avengers...
But sure, let's work under that premise, that's all they had going into Avengers and that's all it took to create an event.

Iron-Man and the Hulk are nowhere near as popular as Superman and Batman so the argument isn't really fair, however I see your point. Do I agree with it? No. The MCU's success is based off their growth of their characters. They all had their time in the spotlight before joining hands in the ultimate spotlight. It's unknown how well BVS will do, I just find they're lacking that chemistry to be put on screen together already. Especially without an established Batman.

I don't think you do see the point then. That is, it's not about how much less money a poorly directed snyder Ironman or Hulk movie would make, it about how much gosh darn money a Snyder IronmanVsHulk movie would make if it happened right now. You keep talking about how "this ain't nolan's batman" or how little money MOS made, or Snyder being bad and I say it again, that matters little given the presented circumstance of an in continuity team up movie.

Not sure what you are meaning about nolans name being touched or getting heat? Confused what that point was about or in reference to.

I'm certain AoU will make a billion...

 

[JOE]

I'm not asking you to how much a musical will make than asking you to compare it to the (musical)standard as those types of film obviously have a pretty fixed market. CBM's aren't some fixed genre where they all tend to make the same amount, they have a massive and broad audience, no doubt due to how transcendent the genre actual is, and they should be seen as any other film when it comes to potential.

If I ask you how much a spy film will stand to make, one that stars Will Smith and is directed by Speilberg or even James Cameron, are you going to run up the list of spy films that mare than 500million(none of which being in 3D mind you) or are you going to look at things like say: Smiths's averages, Cameron/Speilberg's averages, general and foreign market growth, the popularity of the property being adapted, 3D inflation(something not all cbms had)... My point is, yes I get how cbm's are relevant but film itself is more relevant. And the simple fact of the matter is there are alot of films, plenty that had even less going for them than "Batman vs Superman with Wonderwoman as a sequel" that have made a billion so perhaps when you give us a list of how many films have made a billion it might be more insightful to not simply look at four cbms but rather the 20 or so films that have proven how attainable that number is for a big film.
I'm confused, you seem to be under the impression that there were only 2 MCU films prior to Avengers...
But sure, let's work under that premise, that's all they had going into Avengers and that's all it took to create an event.

I don't think you do see the point then. That is, it's not about how much less money a poorly directed snyder Ironman or Hulk movie would make, it about how much gosh darn money a Snyder IronmanVsHulk movie would make if it happened right now. You keep talking about how "this ain't nolan's batman" or how little money MOS made, or Snyder being bad and I say it again, that matters little given the presented circumstance of an in continuity team up movie.

Not sure what you are meaning about nolans name being touched or getting heat? Confused what that point was about or in reference to.

I'm certain AoU will make a billion...

We were talking about during the time of TDK's release, those were the only two present at that time. Coincidentally just months before TDK's release. Or at least that's what I thought we were referring to, if not, I apologize for the confusion. I'm well aware Marvel had more than two movies before The Avengers. Lol.

Thank the Lord. I didn't want to get into a debate how that movie is a definite lock for 1B. Anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional.

 

[Flint Marko]

We were talking about during the time of TDK's release, those were the only two present at that time. Coincidentally just months before TDK's release. Or at least that's what I thought we were referring to, if not, I apologize for the confusion. I'm well aware Marvel had more than two movies before The Avengers. Lol.

Thank the Lord. I didn't want to get into a debate how that movie is a definite lock for 1B. Anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional.

It's to far out to say either way. I think it definitely could gross a billion, but it's far from a sure thing. Anyone acting like it is needs to take a step back and realize we're two years away from the movie, and there's no real guarantee of anything.

 

[JOE]

It's to far out to say either way. I think it definitely could gross a billion, but it's far from a sure thing. Anyone acting like it is needs to take a step back and realize we're two years away from the movie, and there's no real guarantee of anything.

This movie has a ton of pre-requisites needed for BVS to cross the billion dollar line. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Flint Marko]

This movie has a ton of pre-requisites needed for BVS to cross the billion dollar line. That's all I'm saying.

I agree with you completely.

 

[JOE]

I agree with you completely.

 

[Marvin]

We were talking about during the time of TDK's release, those were the only two present at that time. Coincidentally just months before TDK's release. Or at least that's what I thought we were referring to, if not, I apologize for the confusion. I'm well aware Marvel had more than two movies before The Avengers. Lol.

Thank the Lord. I didn't want to get into a debate how that movie is a definite lock for 1B. Anyone that thinks otherwise is delusional.

Yea I was talking about the box office predictions/analysis for the year of 2012. It's well documented and is full of things that seemingly pertain to this sort of discussion.

I had the first avengers at a billion as well. But then again, I suppose I would.

 

[Juha Bach]

If this movie can have a huge opening weekend lets say 170 and has the same multiplier as man of steel it should do well domestically. The international market will be key for a billion. In just one year the china market has grown at an such an insane rate that i wish mos was released this year. I dont know how it will look in 2016 but bvs should do well there. South korea mexico germany and russia are the main huge markets that MOS failed to take off and performed below standard. Thats where WB should prioritize in the international marketing.

 

[mclay18]

Not really, given that Avengers had to basically saturate the movie theater capacity in order to hit that high.

The Avengers ranks #9 in "Widest Releases." It hit $207M because of several factors: 1) It delivered what fans wanted, 2) Years of build-up that paid off, 3) Sterling critical reviews, 4) People were determined to see the movie (hence the largest-per-theater average), and 5) Excellent word-of-mouth. (Not to mention April 2012's offerings were pretty anemic, which enabled Disney to get more screens.)

The Avengers succeeded, but it wasn't due to market saturation (though it helped satiate demand). The third Twilight movie is the widest-opening movie on record, but it barely hit $300M domestic. It's all a matter of perspective and circumstances.

Now BvS will be an event movie. There's no question the novelty factor will be a huge driving force, akin to The Avengers, what with this being WW's first big-screen appearance and watching DC's two titans battle it out. An opening weekend total north of $150M-$170M will be a huge win for this movie. If it goes higher, even better.

 

[JOE]

An OW of 120M + would be a success for this movie. Can't see any reason why it won't at least be in the low 100's.

 

[dnno1]

An OW of 120M + would be a success for this movie. Can't see any reason why it won't at least be in the low 100's.

I guess it would all depend on how much money they are spending on this project right now.

 

[Juha Bach]

An OW of 120M + would be a success for this movie. Can't see any reason why it won't at least be in the low 100's.

I understand the need to be realistic and not get carried away when making prediction but i wouldnt be surprised if WB isnt expecting anything less than 140 minimum and rightly so.

 

[michael1975]

You guys are asking the wrong question here. Batman vs Superman will do well at box office. It will do so well that WB will go through with Justice League. However if people walk out disappointed or they hated the film then Justice League is going to have a rough time at box office.

If enough people walk out hating or not caring for the film they aren't going to go see Justice League. If this happens that's it game over for DCU movies. WB will step back from DC all together in terms films for a good long time.

I'll be honest I think WB is going to have a tough time with DCU both on film and on TV. I could be wrong I openly admit that I could be wrong. Just nothing I have seen thus far has shown any fore thought. What I see are lot of short cuts to being what Marvel is with out pay the dues that Marvel paid.

One thing I want to point out whether you like it or not Marvel set the standards by which comic franchise are handled on film and on TV. Marvel is at the top of there game and has proven themselves. WB on there hand is all over the place and has handled the DCU poorly for the most part. I'm not talking about Spiderman, X-Men movies cause those are not really apart of Marvel Universe in terms of films. Those are own by other studios and have no direct connection to what Disney and Marvel are doing. So like it or not Marvel layed down foundation. So question is will audiences except what WB is doing or think they should have gone the same route as Marvel went. Me personally I would have established my characters before doing a team up movie but that's just me. I'm not the only one who feels the same way.

On that none It think its a load of crap that they are short changing Wonder-Woman the way they are. This would been perfect time to do something even Marvel hasn't done and that is to do a Super Hero movie with a Female lead. Wonder-Woman would been perfect for that role. That's just my opinion any way.

 

[Masone]

It's to far out to say either way. I think it definitely could gross a billion, but it's far from a sure thing. Anyone acting like it is needs to take a step back and realize we're two years away from the movie, and there's no real guarantee of anything.

This movie is guaranteed to make a billion, come on now. MOS 2 with no Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, or Cyborg would have been pushing a billion. This? Not even a question.

As a baseline it'll hit 700 million at the foreign box office and 300 million at the domestic. The question will be how further beyond it can go.

 

[Cooty_Cat]

This movie is guaranteed to make a billion, come on now. MOS 2 with no Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, or Cyborg would have been pushing a billion. This? Not even a question.

As a baseline it'll hit 700 million at the foreign box office and 300 million at the domestic. The question will be how further beyond it can go.

It pushes a billion with good WOM or good critical reception. The only person I can think of that can make a billion with a poorly received movie is Michael Bay. Avengers does not make 1.5 billion without those critics giving the movie legs.

Its like everyone believes having Batman and Superman in the title will break records.

 

[D.P.]

Hindsight is 20/20 when it comes to The Avengers success. It's easy to say it was a lock to do 1B now that the smoke has cleared.

Let's not act like that movie didn't have a lot of question marks surrounding it. A lot.

 

[Masone]

It pushes a billion with good WOM or good critical reception. The only person I can think of that can make a billion with a poorly received movie is Michael Bay. Avengers does not make 1.5 billion without those critics giving the movie legs.

Its like everyone believes having Batman and Superman in the title will break records.

Avengers =/= Batman and Superman. The only huge hit with those Avengers movies was Iron Man. This is different.

Excuse my french, but the critics had **** to do with the Avengers making as much money as it did. They don't have that much power, never have and never will. Critics are like a single speck of dust in a sandstorm when it comes to these big budget blockbusters.

Even if this movie is poorly received like the Transformers movies, it will still cross a billion. It will cross that mark at a max three weeks, but it will most likely be two.

I don't know if the movie will break records, but it will most certainly break the billion dollar barrier in its sleep, whether it's TDK good or Transformers bad.

 

[Arrowshieldfan]

a movie that include batman and superman should make a lot of money plus cameo from other JL will help too........some might choose not to watch it in the theatre because of the dislike of MOS or director