Batman vs Spider-Man vs The Avengers

[Squaremaster316]

Austin Powers: $67,683,989
Spy Who Shagged Me: $312,016,858

Some films can explode due to a predecessor gaining a following.

The reason some are skeptical about the Avengers is due to the fact that Iron Man 2 barely topped the previous one worldwide, even with a massive marketing campaign and a much larger opening to get it started. If it had achieved numbers akin to Spiderman 2, it would probably put more faith in the Avengers chances.

 

[PowerPacked]

To be fair, Batman Begins was battling the dreadful Batman & Robin film eight years prior. It's the reason why the turnout for the film was modest.

I am sick and tired of people pulling this bull**** excuse. It was 'battling' Batman and Robin? Really? Batman and Robin came out EIGHT YEARS BEFORE BEGINS. Almost a decade later, a new cast, and a clearly different tone, and people still blame B&R for apparently associating Batman with that film for eight years, nevermind the TV shows, comics, etc in between. It wasn't hot on the heels or anything, and any person with eyes could tell the two were not alike in tone at all. Stop blaming Batman and Robin for Begins underperformance. It's immature and lazy. It made less because less people went to see it, not because it reminded people of Batman and Robin being bad.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I am sick and tired of people pulling this bull**** excuse. Batman and Robin came out EIGHT YEARS BEFORE BEGINS. It wasn't hot on the heels or anything, and any person with eyes could tell the two were not alike in tone at all. Stop blaming Batman and Robin for Begins underperformance. It's immature and lazy. It made less because less people went to see it, not because it reminded people of Batman and Robin being bad.

 

[PowerPacked]

Sorry for not letting a film made eight years before another one be used as a valid reason for Batman Begins not breaking 400 million. Cry me a damn river, it's like saying Fantastic Four failed because of the 90's film.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

Sorry for not letting a film made eight years before another one be used as a valid reason for Batman Begins not breaking 400 million. Cry me a damn river, it's like saying Fantastic Four failed because of the 90's film.

It is a valid reason. It'll be the same reason why title reboots such as Green Lantern, Ghost Rider, and The Punisher will make modest earnings and/or find a hard time lifting off the ground with studio executives.

Batman & Robin tarnished the Batman franchise, and for awhile was the laughing stock of CBMs. You can call it a bulls**t excuse if you want, but B&R did more damage than you think.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

FF made 330 million because the Fanastic Four franchise was an unknown entity to the general audience.

 

[El Payaso]

I am sick and tired of people pulling this bull**** excuse. It was 'battling' Batman and Robin? Really? Batman and Robin came out EIGHT YEARS BEFORE BEGINS. Almost a decade later, a new cast, and a clearly different tone, and people still blame B&R for apparently associating Batman with that film for eight years, nevermind the TV shows, comics, etc in between. It wasn't hot on the heels or anything, and any person with eyes could tell the two were not alike in tone at all. Stop blaming Batman and Robin for Begins underperformance. It's immature and lazy. It made less because less people went to see it, not because it reminded people of Batman and Robin being bad.

The second part could still justiofy the first part. I mean, nothing in your reasoning denies this, other than you don't like the justification. Even if the opinion were lazy and immature, it could still be true.

I think part of it was that, B&R or not, it was the fifth Batman movie and people in general was tired of it.

 

[Evil Twin]

Batman Begins: $372,710,015 WW
The Dark Knight: $1,001,921,825 WW

Where did all the Batman fans come from?

Iron Man II: $623,933,331
Avengers: ??

All I am saying is that previous film totals do not guarantee anything...nor exclude anything.

No, but I don't see interest in the Avengers growing that much either. IM2 already had a nice increase. There have been two Marvel films released since IM2 and while they did fine, they didn't exactly raise the bar on expectations either.

In some ways, The Avengers is the sixth film in a series. Or, if you believe that RDJ's Iron Man is the tentpole that this is springing out of, the third. Who's going to be interested in seeing RDJ's Tony Stark that somehow missed out on IM and IM2? If you didn't see IM2, Thor, and/or CA, why are you suddenly going to be interested now?

Yeah there's the novelty of the teamup. But, it's not like there's a brand new villain.

Mind you, I think Marvel should give high fives all around when The Avengers surpasses $600 million worldwide. I'm looking forward to it as well. But, I don't think people are discovering The Avengers all of a sudden either.

FWIW, let's not exclude films either. In chronological order:

Iron Man $585,174,222
The Incredible Hulk $263,427,551
Iron Man 2 $623,933,331
Thor $449,326,618
Captain America $368,608,363

IM2 grew 6% over IM. Given that IM and IM2 weren't films that needed to be discovered on home video I ask, who suddenly discovered that Marvel superheroes are good and fit their taste?

 

[PowerPacked]

No, but I don't see interest in the Avengers growing that much either.

13.7 million people would disagree with you.

 

[Squaremaster316]

The second part could still justiofy the first part. I mean, nothing in your reasoning denies this, other than you don't like the justification. Even if the opinion were lazy and immature, it could still be true.

I think part of it was that, B&R or not, it was the fifth Batman movie and people in general was tired of it.

That, and the fact that the most of the audience didn't even know that it was a reboot, and assumed that it was just a prequel to the films that already occurred.

Past films do have an impact on future ones. B&R caused so much damage that the planned sequel, Batman Triumphant, was scrapped because the feedback was so negative.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

More youtube stats PP?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I am sick and tired of people pulling this bull**** excuse. It was 'battling' Batman and Robin? Really? Batman and Robin came out EIGHT YEARS BEFORE BEGINS. Almost a decade later, a new cast, and a clearly different tone, and people still blame B&R for apparently associating Batman with that film for eight years, nevermind the TV shows, comics, etc in between. It wasn't hot on the heels or anything, and any person with eyes could tell the two were not alike in tone at all. Stop blaming Batman and Robin for Begins underperformance. It's immature and lazy. It made less because less people went to see it, not because it reminded people of Batman and Robin being bad.

I'd explain how you're completely wrong, but it's not worth it.

 

[PowerPacked]

More youtube stats PP?

More denial, bro?

And I was actually referring to the itunes record. But Youtube does have that many views, it's true.

 

[Evil Twin]

And 13.7 million free views mean what exactly? It's not like nobody thinks The Avengers isn't going to make a lot of money. All that proves is that it's going to open big. No kidding.

It's reaching the people that aren't already on board for the previous films that The Avengers needs to vault itself up with the big boys that have casual moviegoers interested.

 

[Perfect Cell]

In regards to the whole Batman and Robin/Batman Begins thing, you'd be surprised how many people I talked to thought Batman Begins was a prequel to Batman '89. There was clearly a connection in people's minds between Begins and the film series that came before it. Obviously my personal experiences might not represent a larger trend, but I wanted to see if others had experienced the same thing.

 

[Adamantium Man]

IM2 grew 6% over IM. Given that IM and IM2 weren't films that needed to be discovered on home video I ask, who suddenly discovered that Marvel superheroes are good and fit their taste?

Fangirls. Search the Avengers tag on tumblr if you don't believe me. They love hot guys, they love bromance, and they love the slashing (as in fanfic) opportunities. Many of them missed the two Iron Mans and are now catching up.

 

[PowerPacked]

Cap also was a killer on DVD/Blu Ray.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I'd explain how you're completely wrong, but it's not worth it.

He's not. The general public doesn't view Batman and Robin the way the fanbase does, and certainly it influenced a new direction but hardly effected the overall profitability of Batman. Batman had an exceptionally strong TV presence during the eight year span between the two movies. It was still very profitable, and even spawned a very popular spinoff: Batman Beyond. During that time period, and still today, they aren't like Marvel. WB doesn't need superhero movies when it has Wedding Crashers. Also the audience who saw Begins would've been incredibly young, too young to care, about Batman and Robin. Batman Begins probably didn't make as much because, frankly, it featured a bunch of sh***y villains no one cares about. In my opinion I didn't find the marketing for BB to be particularly spectacular either.

They also didn't stop production on the like 5 Batman films they were trying to produce in the interim because of B&R, don't be ridiculous. They, nor the people involved, cared about that movie after the fact (in fact, as many have pointed out, they probably were pretty happy with it as far as money is concerned).

 

[CConn]

No, he's definitely wrong.

 

[The Morningstar]

Batman and Robin wasn't just a terrible movie, it was a financial disaster too, all things considered. It made less than Forever but had a bigger budget and arguably the biggest movie star the world has ever known.

It wasn't just the fanboys/girls that hated it.

 

[jmc]

Batman and Robin was received so badly it single handedly changed the course of all superhero films there after. Batman was a tainted brand after that for not only mainstream audiences but Batman fans as well, and anyone who says it didn't have an influence on the box office of Begins is simply looking to argue. Hell you had Batman fans like me feeling lackluster towards it, I was so disillusioned by what happen previously that I didn't even bother going to see Begins opening day, I don't even remember if I went opening weekend to be honest, didn't keep tabs on the making of the film or who was in it really, what the reviews were, nothing. But it managed to remind people like me and the Joe Average's of the world as word of mouth spread as to why Batman is truly one of the best characters in comics, and I'd argue it was the first time anyone had really seen it on film. As for TDK hitting the billion, it wasn't on the back of Batman fans, it was Batman fans and everyone else, you don't make a billion dollar on a superhero film on the back of a rabid fan base, TDK brought in such a diverse audience the likes of which you don't usually get in these films, and it was all on the back of a perfect storm, right place, right time, right villain, right story, right actor, right director.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

He's not. The general public doesn't view Batman and Robin the way the fanbase does, and certainly it influenced a new direction but hardly effected the overall profitability of Batman. Batman had an exceptionally strong TV presence during the eight year span between the two movies. It was still very profitable, and even spawned a very popular spinoff: Batman Beyond. During that time period, and still today, they aren't like Marvel. WB doesn't need superhero movies when it has Wedding Crashers. Also the audience who saw Begins would've been incredibly young, too young to care, about Batman and Robin. Batman Begins probably didn't make as much because, frankly, it featured a bunch of sh***y villains no one cares about. In my opinion I didn't find the marketing for BB to be particularly spectacular either.

They also didn't stop production on the like 5 Batman films they were trying to produce in the interim because of B&R, don't be ridiculous. They, nor the people involved, cared about that movie after the fact (in fact, as many have pointed out, they probably were pretty happy with it as far as money is concerned).

He is.

Batman and Robin was a disaster to all audiences that weren't kids. TV animated presence is much smaller than mainstream movie presence. The Batman series was still seen as a joke to majority of audiences after B&R. Bad movies can hurt good sequels (or in this case, a reboot) in terms of box office. In terms of superhero movies, we've seen that happen to The Incredible Hulk and X-men: First Class.

Also, money did affect the series. They had a script for a fifth Batman movie (Batman Triumphant), but the project was scrapped after how much of a failure Batman was. In Fact, WB had no idea what to do with the series. It was constant idea after idea. From Batman Triumphant to Batman: Darknight to Batman Beyond to Batman Year One to Batman Begins, WB kept greenlighting and cancelling projects in favor of the next one in line. Much like Superman, WB had no idea how to continue with the Batman series. So, they put their trust in Christopher Nolan and finally decided on Batman Begins.

About Batman Begins, I thought Batman Begins was a prequel to 89' Batman, but then again I was 13 and wasn't really paying attention to the movies.

I'd say that Batman and Robin (along with the choice of villains) did affect Batman Begins because of the perception of Batman at the time. The franchise was seen as a joke, much like what the last 2 Superman movies did to Superman, except it didn't take 19 years for another Batman movie. It's not like now, or before the TDK. Batman was never as stable a movie franchise as it was before Nolan. I'd say only after 89' Batman it was stable, but after Batman Returns it was a seesaw in terms of stability due to conflicts over what Burton wanted and what WB wanted.

 

[actionavenue]

I love the other two, but Batman wins for several reasons:

1) Its an established film franchise. Spiderman is a reboot and this is the first Avenger film.

2) We don't know how good the other two will be.

3) Christopher Nolan always delivers and if anyone can break the third-act curse, its him.

4) Its Nolan's last Batman film.

5) It will be riding off the success of The Dark Knight. Remember how popular Spiderman 3 was after Spiderman 2's success? Yeah its gonna make that look microscopic.

You make some very strong arguments. Being the biggest nerd in my family, I will want to see all these films and plan to add them in my DVD collection. You are probably right about Batman movie coming out on top, however, I am most excited about The Avengers.
_________________________________________

Read my zombie blog http://freakindeadjed.blogspot.com
Check out my artwork at http://zazzle.com Type in "actionave" into the search box.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Damn, that's a very old post of mine!

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

I am sick and tired of people pulling this bull**** excuse. It was 'battling' Batman and Robin? Really? Batman and Robin came out EIGHT YEARS BEFORE BEGINS. Almost a decade later, a new cast, and a clearly different tone, and people still blame B&R for apparently associating Batman with that film for eight years, nevermind the TV shows, comics, etc in between. It wasn't hot on the heels or anything, and any person with eyes could tell the two were not alike in tone at all. Stop blaming Batman and Robin for Begins underperformance. It's immature and lazy. It made less because less people went to see it, not because it reminded people of Batman and Robin being bad.

It wasn't just due to B&R. I think what happened with Batman Begins, was that people had seen four underwhelming Batman movies already, and thought they had seen all that Batman had to offer on the big screen, so didn't bother turning out for BB as much as they would have, if it had been the first serious live action Batman film.