Superman Returns BO numbers aside... Is there just too much negativity in terms of WOM?

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Is the word of mouth on SR just too negative from either the general audience or split too much within the Superman fan relm to garner us the sequel many of us desire?

 

[TheBat812]

No, if anything the general word of mouth is rather positive.

 

[The Shredder]

From my experience, SR's word of mouth is much akin to that of Ang Lee's HULK. Some enjoyed the film, and some hated it. I can't say I've heard/read about this film in such a positive light like that of Spider-Man, or Batman Begins.

 

[dark_b]

i think the general word of mouth was bad. i was oen of them. seriously. i was oen of them. after i saw the movie i made sure that all my friends will know that i think that this movie is not worth the money.

its better to watch SR at home o the dvd. that was my opinion. and a lot of people didnt wathc this movie.
its to slow for the theater and has not enough action for a sumber 200 milion budget movie.

 

[BMM]

I haven't heard any overwhelmingly negative or positive buzz about the movie save for what I read here. It's not as though people leave their 9-5 jobs cursing or praising B-list superhero movies, especially years after their releases.

Personally, I've heard worse buzz about the likes of the first Fantastic Four movie and that got a sequel. Despite the first movie's pitfalls, the sequel's managing to generate a lot of interest just through the addition of more action and a cool looking alien super-being (hint, hint Warner Bros.)

Basically, the studio should probably command a more action heavy and less introspective/somber movie with a better story for a summer release. Other than that, general audiences don't care about the rest of the crap we worry about (whether we like it or not).

 

[superbaby]

Is the word of mouth on SR just too negative from either the general audience or split too much within the Superman fan relm to garner us the sequel many of us desire?

the main problem is... the general audience doesn't bother.
SR failed to create excitement.

 

[Steelsheen]

From my experience, SR's word of mouth is much akin to that of Ang Lee's HULK. Some enjoyed the film, and some hated it. I can't say I've heard/read about this film in such a positive light like that of Spider-Man, or Batman Begins.

agreed.

i for one didnt really say anything that would detter the general public from seeing it, but of the opinions i managed to gather/ overhear, a lot were mixed. although there was some "that was a good movie", it wasnt a "yeah its good go see it now!" type of reaction, more so it was "uhh, it was ok". there was also quite a bit of "boring as heck!" and "i dont get it, why was blah blah blah?"

 

[GarudA]

Most people I know who watched it did not like it. When Spiderman 3 came out their was a big buzz and everyone at work wanted to see it. But SR had nothing, it was mentioned a few times where some said it was too boring No Buzz nothing.

 

[LeMartien]

People thought the movie was a action movie but it was a sad movie ! People think hero = action
Spidey is not supes

 

[nintendo nerd]

Most of the people I've talked about SR, said it was OK, but needed more Action. They thought Routh did a good job.

 

[TaintedBlood]

the only people who hate the movie seem to be under 20 year old fan boys..... the general audience seemed to enjoy it.

 

[buggs0268]

the only people who hate the movie seem to be under 20 year old fan boys..... the general audience seemed to enjoy it.

That isn't what I have seen. A lot of people over 20 hated it.

 

[The Shredder]

That isn't what I have seen. A lot of people over 20 hated it.

This is true.

 

[mjbull23]

Put it this way. I remember the week that SR opened, I had exactly ONE..co-worker mention it to me, and his passing comment was "Yea, I might go see it, although there really aren't any big stars in the movie aside from Kevin Spacey"...

The week that SM3 opened, I had at least 7 people ask me at work that day if I was going to go see the film over the weekend, and aside from that I overheard four seperate conversations about the movie...

 

[CGHulk]

Actually everyone I've talked to either haven't seen it or it was nothing worth remembering after they've seen it.

 

[Pickle-El]

It's WOM was easily better than that of X1...and and look at what Bryan was able to bring with X2 in terms of film and b.o. ....I think a loud minority of negativity, those few around the net who are STILL hung up the suit no matter what they say, will make no difference in impacting 'MOS'. I see the sequel to SR easily doing what X2 did from X1. And, much like the X-Flicks, I can forsee a franchise in which the numbers continue to grow for each of these new Superman films....surpassing those of the X-films and the new Batfilms in total box office, leaving Supes as 2nd only to Spidey in b.o. cume when it's all said and done.

Assuming of course, Singer is behind the wheel.....that's just how I feel. Going by the 'sites' out here to gauge what people feel about SR, we all know how that has gone. The simple request is 'more action', and clean the story up in the editing room. WOM was positive for SR. That is indisputable when you use what's out there to see how word of mouth went.....You can't provide large inundated, indisputable data (samples) to prove otherwise.

And, 'My Fed Ex guy, his wife and their kids' friends all thought it sucked' isn't much of a leg to stand on.

 

[El Payaso]

So, people who hated it saw bad WOM and people who liked it didn't see it.

 

[Angeloz]

WOM = Wicked Old Men. I thought that was Lex?

Angeloz

 

[true316]

I haven't heard any overwhelmingly negative or positive buzz about the movie save for what I read here. It's not as though people leave their 9-5 jobs cursing or praising B-list superhero movies, especially years after their releases.

Personally, I've heard worse buzz about the likes of the first Fantastic Four movie and that got a sequel. Despite the first movie's pitfalls, the sequel's managing to generate a lot of interest just through the addition of more action and a cool looking alien super-being (hint, hint Warner Bros.)

Basically, the studio should probably command a more action heavy and less introspective/somber movie with a better story for a summer release. Other than that, general audiences don't care about the rest of the crap we worry about (whether we like it or not).

I think this is pretty accurate. It is easy to look at the Hype and think there is a disproportionate amount of negativity about the film. But this is where we fanboys (and girls), gather to overanalyze and hyperscrutinize (is that a word?) such life-altering details as belt buckles and spit curls. The kind of stuff general audience members don't care about. Outside of the internet, I haven't really heard any significant negativity about the film (but that is just my own experience for whatever it's worth). There seems to be a natural tendency from the fandom to overreact. If they like a film it becomes "TEH GREATEST FILM EVER!" If they don't like a movie it becomes "TEH WORST FILM EVER!" In my opinion, at the end of the day SR was a good (not great) movie. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

WOM was positive for SR. That is indisputable when you use what's out there to see how word of mouth went.....You can't provide large inundated, indisputable data (samples) to prove otherwise.

LOL I'm sorry but what "indisputable" data do you have out there to say WOM was positive? You say "WOM was positive for SR" but offer nothing to back up that statment. If you dont have anything to prove your initial premise that WOM was good so why would others need to provide "large inundated, indisputable data to prove otherswise?" That's the equivelant of trying someone for murder and not being able to prove they killed anyone but still wanting a conviction because the defendant cant prove they didnt kill anyone.

Looking at the box office take and the fact the film completely crawled to even make $200 million donestically (longest film ever to do so) is a pretty fair indicator that the public had a lukewarm response to the film at best. Since WOm is a term that's used to explain box office performance, I'd say that points more to the fact that WOm was generally indifferent towards the film.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

So, people who hated it saw bad WOM and people who liked it didn't see it.

In my case I think it's very good and I do acknowledge an overall positive WOM when it comes to it's critical success.

However the general audience and Superman fans do seem a bit split on this film.

People forget we can like something and be objective. I can also dislike aspects of something and be objective. None of us will ever get the kind of Superman live action interpretation unless we are willing to see where there are shortcomings.

I've taken some heat on the SR side of things when I mention areas where it is short. I've taken much more heat in the SV forums pointing out where it falls short. I just hope there is a point where being a fan of a particular incarnation doesn't overshadow the spirit of wanting something to be as good as it can be.

 

[Excel]

supermamns wom is nothing like the hul.

its what is called "mixed to good" which is what the first xmen had.

had superman got more money...nooone would be complaining.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

supermamns wom is nothing like the hul.

its what is called "mixed to good" which is what the first xmen had.

had superman got more money...nooone would be complaining.

True, it would be more in line with X-men's reaction than Hulk. Still it did underperform either way. If it had more WOM like the first 2 spidey movies there would have been better bo numbers though.

 

[Excel]

LOL I'm sorry but what "indisputable" data do you have out there to say WOM was positive? You say "WOM was positive for SR" but offer nothing to back up that statment. If you dont have anything to prove your initial premise that WOM was good so why would others need to provide "large inundated, indisputable data to prove otherswise?" That's the equivelant of trying someone for murder and not being able to prove they killed anyone but still wanting a conviction because the defendant cant prove they didnt kill anyone.

Looking at the box office take and the fact the film completely crawled to even make $200 million donestically (longest film ever to do so) is a pretty fair indicator that the public had a lukewarm response to the film at best. Since WOm is a term that's used to explain box office performance, I'd say that points more to the fact that WOm was generally indifferent towards the film.

never use box office totals when discussing films worde of mouth. spidey 3 will do 900 million and its wom SUCKS. The reason Superman crawled to 200 million is because pirates opened the weekend after it. Given thta fact and that supes openig wasnt that huge, the fact that supes even got to 200 million is quite astounding.

FACTS-
3.9 multiplier
24.8% average weekend drop
76% on rotten tomatoes
7.0 on imdb
B on yahoo

its word of mouth was good thats why it had fantastic legs once the huge competition stopped; its mor ethat its word of mouth just ewasnt spectacular One reviewer summed it up best

"A good film no doubt, but it's not quite the slam dunk you want it to be"

That is because everybody knows a superman film could be absolutley spectacular...audiences kids, teens, and adults alike, all know it. But Returns was not spectacular, it was exactly like its box office: good, but not great; more of a dissappointment due to huge expectations than an actually bad performance.

There are 2 ends to the spectrum- 1 end with HULK, DAREDEVIL, GHOSTRIDER, BATMAN &ROBIN...and then 1 end with BATMAN BEGINS, SPIDER-MAN 1 & 2, X2.

Superman Returns is smack dab in the middle, which is why it's wrong to say superman returns/its word of mouth was BAD or GOOD...in reality is right in the middle.

 

[Excel]

True, it would be more in line with X-men's reaction than Hulk. Still it did underperform either way. If it had more WOM like the first 2 spidey movies there would have been better bo numbers though.

not much. Had Batman Begins opened in Supermans weekend it would have totaled roughly 175 million. Wor dof mouth only does so much; Pirates 2 was a monster and would have destroyed superman no matter what. A lesser film wouldnt have gotten 185 million; nor would a better film have topped 220 million.

Look at it this way-Despite the opening of the biggest film ever, new weekend record holder PIRATES 2 against it, SUPERMAN RETURNS 2nd weekend drop was still SMALLER then that of SPIDER-MAN 3, FANTASTIC FOUR, THE HULK, BATMAN & ROBIN...

Its not a case of "if Superman was a better film" that woulda made a difference, its a case of "had pirates 2 not been there". If its an average July and the opening film makes 50 million instead of 135 million, superman would drop 46-48% or a little worse batman begins or spidey 2, something I proved in another thread. The fact that RETURNS onyl increased 31% from Thursday to friday instead of a 55-70% increase like usual shows PIrates 2 completely overwhelmed it.

Returns weekend went

Fri: 6.9 +32% (shockingly low due to pirates destroying the Friday record thus stealing much of superman action/teenage boy/kiddie/date audience)

Sat: 8.5 +22% (shockingly low increase again for same reasons above)Sun: 6.3 -25%

No pirates and it does...

Fri: 8.3 +55% (that is the MINIMUM it would have gone up)
Sat: 11.2 +35% (kids/families would have been seeing this hence staurday increase)
Sun: 8.4 - 26%

total: 28 million -48%...would have given superman 207 million asusming every other day went as it actually did; with the same daily drops supes woulda totaled 220ish.