Rise of the Silver Surfer BOX OFFICE Discussion

[GreenKToo]

C.B. = comic book(s) and I have seen just about everyone of them that has been made into film.

C.B.?

How many Citizens' Band movies do you see?

 

[GL's Light]

The actuals are in:

$ 4,239,993 (- 53.6%) for a total of $ 123,881,586 so far.

The actual for Transformers ended up as $ 70,502,384 for the 3-day; $ 155,405,412 for the first seven days.

 

[GreenKToo]

That stupid friends and family screening he held was the cause of the return to krypton scene being cut, a 10 mill cut I might add.
I mean who gets only friends/family to screen a film they have made. It should have been total strangers IMHO.

Not to the tune of 265 million they were not. Sight unseen, I know TF's has more action in it then SR had, and it cost 115 million less. Give me a break. I still want to know where 265 went ? I mean in FF 2, we had the helicopter scene, the Silver Surfer, plus all the other SPX that went allong with it, and it cost 130.

 

[Tony Stark]

No, you're projecting your opinion as objective fact. Just as you sincerely dislike the film, there are others who sincerely like it. I've seen people praise Ghost Rider, which I think was pretty awful. I disagree with their opinion of GR, but I don't question the sincerity of their views.

I'll give you this, it being a piece of crap is my opinion, it being completely unoriginal is a fact.

 

[GreenKToo]

If only the plot of Luthor would have been him stealing the crystals to make weapons, instead of making land......aww well.
It seems like alot, (not all) of studios tend to try to play on the success of past films, instead of trying to be original.
You cant blame them for trying that, but when it doesnt work, its so disappointing to the fans.

 

[Downhere]

I finally saw F4-2 last week and I must say, it is disappointing that this film is not making more money. It was 10 times better than the previous films and I was impressed with what they were able to accomplish with a 130 million dollar budget. This film deserves more and I think they just released it in the wrong time frame.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Even if it was only 200 million Singer spent, that movie was still pure crap that is way further away from the Character than anything Story/Frost/Arad did with FF.

SR is the most unimaginitive movie, I've seen in years. Basically it is a 2 1/2 hour tribute to the Donner movies. If I had wanted to see that, I'd have saved 10 bucks and watched the Donner movies on DVD at home.

It's just amazing to me that Singer, who was so creative and inventive with what he did on the first two X-men movies could produce such garbage. The only reason anyone defends the film is to shill for Superman. I love Superman he was one of my fondest childhood memories watching reruns of the 50's serials, along with the Reeves movies and the Saturday morning cartoons. But I'm not going to defend that piece of crap.

WB was so scared of what Abrams was trying to do, that they just threw it all out, and went the safe route. The fact is Abrams had some good ideas, but needed guidance, changing the more contraversial things and directing it to the more orthodox Superman lore but with Abrams' ingenious way of story telling.

I like Brian Singer, I think he's a talented director and story writer, but I'm not going to patronize him, just because I'm a fan. I'm going to be honest with him and tell him when he produces crap, and that was crap.

Well thats strange, because i have never really liked Superman, found him kinda boring compared to my favourite Marvel characters (X-Men, Spiderman, Hulk and Ghost Rider) but i thought SR was FANTASTIC, and i am now reading and loving the comics.

 

[Carp Man]

Weekend actuals are in. FF 2 $ 123,881,586 domestic. $ 206,382,109 WW. TF's $ 155,045,412 domestic. $ 252,098,405 WW. All #'s thru 7-8.

 

[Carp Man]

I finally saw F4-2 last week and I must say, it is disappointing that this film is not making more money. It was 10 times better than the previous films and I was impressed with what they were able to accomplish with a 130 million dollar budget. This film deserves more and I think they just released it in the wrong time frame.

This movie had everything the 1st movie did not. Flow, continuity, no holes big enough to drive 2 18 wheelers thru side by side. Better dialog, better sets. Better action scenes. The Surfer was well done, and stuck to the original design. Better everything all the way around. I was very pleased. t: The whole scene with Sue on fire was the best comedy scene in the whole movie. When she did finaly flame off you see her lying on the ground naked, but unlike the 1st film, they did not dwell on it, or go for the cheep thrill, like they would have in the 1st one. It was tastful, respectful, and well done. Thumbs way up for resisting the temptation to get a cheep thrill.

 

[Agent 194]

You know we were talking about Routh's characterization of Superman earlier (I know we're on the FF boards), but it brought to mind something that I have thought about often. And something that just crossed my mind again last night. Now, I hope we're all mature enough to discuss this, --- but last night there was some movie on with Rock Hudson and Doris Day and it just reminds me how strikingly similar Hudson looked to the way Curt Swan and later Wayne Boring drew Superman. I know this had to be something of an influence. Right around the time that Hudson was a star was the time Superman was drawn with longer legs, taller. Like Hudson. Even the longer face. Has this ever crossed anyone's mind? Very curious. <Does anyone know who Rock Hudson is?>

 

[Agent 194]

I'll go even further and tie it in with FF. I always felt that as Kirby and Fantastic Four hit it's stride I felt Jack based Reed on actor Jeffrey Hunter.http://www.jeffreyhuntermovies.com./photo.htm

I wish I knew how to post images.

 

[Ita-KalEl]

IMO it's unfair to compare FF2 to SR.
And it's unfair for Superman Returns.

1)

FF2

Critics Tomatometer 36%
Users Tomatometer 61%

SR
Critics Tomatometer 76%
Users Tomatometer 76%

2)

SR was not the Superman movie that a part of the fans was waiting for. I agree that it lacked action and the story was too similar to the Donner movie. But the movie remains good.

The story of the worst superhero movie ever made is pure crap. Superman Returns is a good sh movie.
A lot of haters wrote that the box office numbers proved that SR was a failure: it did only $200m, so it is clear that it was a disappointment.
For the haters SR did only $200m because it sucked.
If you say that SR was hurted by the terrible release date and by the bad marketing, they will write that you are a stupid fanboy.
For example, LexLives (a famous troll in the SR forum), last year predicted a megasuccess for FF2 (+400m ww) to prove that Superman is a dead franchise or that SR sucked or that a reboot is needed .

But THIS YEAR, three movies with the potential of $400m have done only +$300 because of their bad release dates: Spiderman 3, Shrek 3 and POTC3 were three huge movies released in May. Even FF2 was hurted by the huge competition.

3)

FF2 is a sequel.
When FF was released this forum was full of "Amazing movie! It is a great movie! It's better than Batman Begins!"
IMO FF was a barely decent sh movie, and it was considered a success only because its $100m budget.
But this is my opinion, for the vast majority of this forum FF was a great success.
With FF2 they increased the budget of $30m and they are doing at least $20-25m less than the first movie (I doubt that it will do better overseas).
IMO FF2 is a good movie, far better than the first one, but IMO they did a mistake increasing the budget.

SR, which is considered in this forum a sort of disaster, did $391m ww (a great result for a sh movie). At the WB it seems that they have decided to do an action packed sequel with a reduced budget ($170-180m).
IMO it is the right choice and I'm quite sure that it will be a b.o. hit, because I think that the situation of the new Superman franchise is far better than what we think. A lot of people hated it before the release date, and the expectations of the spiderman numbers were really insane.
SR was easily a $220-230m movie without the release of POTC2 after a week and a good sequel can easily be more profitable.

I think that the perception of the reality sometimes is distorted.

 

[Hiruu]

Just an addendum to what I wrote above, what happened with Brian Singer and Superman Returns is the perfect example that you can't just take a director and say, "oh look how successful he was here, we should get him to do this."

This is exactly what I've heard on these boards for two solid years, on how if this director did FF, or if that director did FF, it would be so much better.

Could Sam Raimi have done FF better than Tim Story? Maybe, but I don't know. I don't even know how Sam feels about the characters, and even if he loved them, and they were his favorite, that may not be enough.

Brian Singer was an excellent match for X-men. Perhaps his life experience allowed him to relate to the X-men and their struggles, and while everything wasn't exact to the comics, he got the basic tone right, and the central characters right (except Cyclops).

But even though he was lobbying for the Superman job, he was the wrong person for it. While he deserves credit for getting Brandon Routh, who did an excellent job, he deserves as much blame for the casting of Lois Lane, which was a complete mismatch.

Again, this isn't to complain about Brian Singer, who's a very talented guy, but only to say, just because you're good at one thing, doesn't make you good at another.

That was my MAJOR compliant about Superman Returns (or Superman redone) as well, and I'll not beat this dead horse, but Singer needs to be some of HIS ideas to the next movie...hopefully it's not delayed either.

 

[DieSmiling]

IMO it's unfair to compare FF2 to SR.
And it's unfair for Superman Returns.

1)

FF2

Critics Tomatometer 36%
Users Tomatometer 61%

SR
Critics Tomatometer 76%
Users Tomatometer 76%

2)

SR was not the Superman movie that a part of the fans was waiting for. I agree that it lacked action and the story was too similar to the Donner movie. But the movie remains good.

The story of the worst superhero movie ever made is pure crap. Superman Returns is a good sh movie.
A lot of haters wrote that the box office numbers proved that SR was a failure: it did only $200m, so it is clear that it was a disappointment.
For the haters SR did only $200m because it sucked.
If you say that SR was hurted by the terrible release date and by the bad marketing, they will write that you are a stupid fanboy.
For example, LexLives (a famous troll in the SR forum), last year predicted a megasuccess for FF2 (+400m ww) to prove that Superman is a dead franchise or that SR sucked or that a reboot is needed .

But THIS YEAR, three movies with the potential of $400m have done only +$300 because of their bad release dates: Spiderman 3, Shrek 3 and POTC3 were three huge movies released in May. Even FF2 was hurted by the huge competition.

3)

FF2 is a sequel.
When FF was released this forum was full of "Amazing movie! It is a great movie! It's better than Batman Begins!"
IMO FF was a barely decent sh movie, and it was considered a success only because its $100m budget.
But this is my opinion, for the vast majority of this forum FF was a great success.
With FF2 they increased the budget of $30m and they are doing at least $20-25m less than the first movie (I doubt that it will do better overseas).
IMO FF2 is a good movie, far better than the first one, but IMO they did a mistake increasing the budget.

SR, which is considered in this forum a sort of disaster, did $391m ww (a great result for a sh movie). At the WB it seems that they have decided to do an action packed sequel with a reduced budget ($170-180m).
IMO it is the right choice and I'm quite sure that it will be a b.o. hit, because I think that the situation of the new Superman franchise is far better than what we think. A lot of people hated it before the release date, and the expectations of the spiderman numbers were really insane.
SR was easily a $220-230m movie without the release of POTC2 after a week and a good sequel can easily be more profitable.

I think that the perception of the reality sometimes is distorted.

Excellent post.

 

[Hiruu]

IMO it's unfair to compare FF2 to SR.
And it's unfair for Superman Returns.

1)

FF2

Critics Tomatometer 36%
Users Tomatometer 61%

SR
Critics Tomatometer 76%
Users Tomatometer 76%

2)

SR was not the Superman movie that a part of the fans was waiting for. I agree that it lacked action and the story was too similar to the Donner movie. But the movie remains good.

The story of the worst superhero movie ever made is pure crap. Superman Returns is a good sh movie.
A lot of haters wrote that the box office numbers proved that SR was a failure: it did only $200m, so it is clear that it was a disappointment.
For the haters SR did only $200m because it sucked.
If you say that SR was hurted by the terrible release date and by the bad marketing, they will write that you are a stupid fanboy.
For example, LexLives (a famous troll in the SR forum), last year predicted a megasuccess for FF2 (+400m ww) to prove that Superman is a dead franchise or that SR sucked or that a reboot is needed .

But THIS YEAR, three movies with the potential of $400m have done only +$300 because of their bad release dates: Spiderman 3, Shrek 3 and POTC3 were three huge movies released in May. Even FF2 was hurted by the huge competition.

3)

FF2 is a sequel.
When FF was released this forum was full of "Amazing movie! It is a great movie! It's better than Batman Begins!"
IMO FF was a barely decent sh movie, and it was considered a success only because its $100m budget.
But this is my opinion, for the vast majority of this forum FF was a great success.
With FF2 they increased the budget of $30m and they are doing at least $20-25m less than the first movie (I doubt that it will do better overseas).
IMO FF2 is a good movie, far better than the first one, but IMO they did a mistake increasing the budget.

SR, which is considered in this forum a sort of disaster, did $391m ww (a great result for a sh movie). At the WB it seems that they have decided to do an action packed sequel with a reduced budget ($170-180m).
IMO it is the right choice and I'm quite sure that it will be a b.o. hit, because I think that the situation of the new Superman franchise is far better than what we think. A lot of people hated it before the release date, and the expectations of the spiderman numbers were really insane.
SR was easily a $220-230m movie without the release of POTC2 after a week and a good sequel can easily be more profitable.

I think that the perception of the reality sometimes is distorted.

Well, I don't think it's fair to grade ANY movie in the genre, based on what other films did, but instead to grade on a performance measure, which determines how the studios view the genre as a whole. Based on that, SR disappointed mightly, since it failed to recoup it production cost, using the simple 50-50 ratio (which isn't always accurate, but a good swag). The Franchise did well, but the movie brokeeven, and TW-AOL and Singer himself, haven't exactly been out there on the forefront in pushing a sequel. I hope he can deliver with a more original story, but time will tell.

As For FF2, it was a disappointment, since it was so much better than the first film, but it's doing really well overseas, and based on the slate of countries remaining, there is a strong chance it will top the international # from before.

 

[highguard]

^^ All the sequels this year seem to be burning up the foreign box office. Hopefully we will see the same thing with the FF. They really need to do a day and release kind of thing though.

It would be good to know how the foreign box office is going to play out.

If they had done this there might have been a sequel announcement by now.

Now no doubt we are going to have to wait at least until it hits like 130 million domestic.

By the end of the week we will no doubt have about 127 million which leaves us with 3 million to get. over the next week.

I hate the slow crawl.

 

[Tony Stark]

This is exactly the kind of shilling I'm talking about. If the film didn't have the name Superman or had Singer's name attached it would have been ripped to shreds.

One guy on the Tomatometer got it 100% right and that was Roger Ebert, who gave it 2 stars.

"This is a glum, lackluster movie in which even the big effects sequences seem dutiful instead of exhilarating."

That pretty much summed up my feelings. To be fair he didn't review FF1 well either, he didn't review FF2 at all, and I'll admit he probably wouldn't have liked it.

However the only things good about SR are that which are ripped off from the Donner film, because basically the whole movie is plagerized from the original Donner film. You have Superman crash landing from Krypton, you have the scene on the farm, and you have Superman pining for Lois in Metropolis, the parts that Singer added are pure unadulterated CRAP.

If you like the movie fine, but you can't argue that there's nothing original about the movie. You may like or dislike the Fantastic Four films, but at least the writers/directors tried to do something fresh and new.

There's also another thing that Superman Returns can't say, and that's that it captured the heart of the characters. All of the main characters are 100% off, the most compelling character in the film is Perry White's nephew and Lois' fiance, and he was never in the comics.

The film is nothing but a half assed attempt to recreate the Donner film, and all they came up with is a frickin 2 million dollar shot of a guy getting a bullet in the eye. Even that was a total Matrix type rip off.

I know the fanboy shilling will continue, but in reality it is only a meager effort to bring the character back to the screen.

And however you feel it compares to the Fantastic Four movies it pales in comparison to the Spider-man movies or the first two X-men movies or the first Batman or Batman Begins.

And that's just a plain fact.

IMO it's unfair to compare FF2 to SR.
And it's unfair for Superman Returns.

1)

FF2

Critics Tomatometer 36%
Users Tomatometer 61%

SR
Critics Tomatometer 76%
Users Tomatometer 76%

2)

SR was not the Superman movie that a part of the fans was waiting for. I agree that it lacked action and the story was too similar to the Donner movie. But the movie remains good.

The story of the worst superhero movie ever made is pure crap. Superman Returns is a good sh movie.
A lot of haters wrote that the box office numbers proved that SR was a failure: it did only $200m, so it is clear that it was a disappointment.
For the haters SR did only $200m because it sucked.
If you say that SR was hurted by the terrible release date and by the bad marketing, they will write that you are a stupid fanboy.
For example, LexLives (a famous troll in the SR forum), last year predicted a megasuccess for FF2 (+400m ww) to prove that Superman is a dead franchise or that SR sucked or that a reboot is needed .

But THIS YEAR, three movies with the potential of $400m have done only +$300 because of their bad release dates: Spiderman 3, Shrek 3 and POTC3 were three huge movies released in May. Even FF2 was hurted by the huge competition.

3)

FF2 is a sequel.
When FF was released this forum was full of "Amazing movie! It is a great movie! It's better than Batman Begins!"
IMO FF was a barely decent sh movie, and it was considered a success only because its $100m budget.
But this is my opinion, for the vast majority of this forum FF was a great success.
With FF2 they increased the budget of $30m and they are doing at least $20-25m less than the first movie (I doubt that it will do better overseas).
IMO FF2 is a good movie, far better than the first one, but IMO they did a mistake increasing the budget.

SR, which is considered in this forum a sort of disaster, did $391m ww (a great result for a sh movie). At the WB it seems that they have decided to do an action packed sequel with a reduced budget ($170-180m).
IMO it is the right choice and I'm quite sure that it will be a b.o. hit, because I think that the situation of the new Superman franchise is far better than what we think. A lot of people hated it before the release date, and the expectations of the spiderman numbers were really insane.
SR was easily a $220-230m movie without the release of POTC2 after a week and a good sequel can easily be more profitable.

I think that the perception of the reality sometimes is distorted.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Look at this, I offer a olive branch of friendship and you guys rip all over my favorite movie.
To quote the Green Goblin-

I offered you friendship and you spat in my face!t:

 

[Tony Stark]

OK, I'll lay off Superman Returns, but it's rather funny how on every board on the forums when someone brings it up, it gets ripped to shreds.

 

[GL's Light]

I know the fanboy shilling will continue.

Opinions that are contrary to yours are not "shilling". People have different points of view and they are genuinely held, including about originality or lack of it, and the quality of characterization. Some people love the FF films, some think they're garbage. That doesn't make the defenders shills. Now, since SR has been talked to death over the last year, how about we leave further discussion of it to the Superman forum and not keep bringing it up here.

 

[Carp Man]

...

 

[highguard]

Look at this, I offer a olive branch of friendship and you guys rip all over my favorite movie.
To quote the Green Goblin-

I offered you friendship and you spat in my face!t:

hahahahahahahhahahahah

As you can tell the performance of FF2 at the box office has us a little nervous and maybe a bit ungenerous.

However I am starting to see the light. SR got its sequel and I think that the sequel can take it to another level.

FF has more of an uphill struggle cause we never had the acclaim that STM had but we still have a shot, but few people will cut Fox some slack now after what they did with Galactus. They should have learned from the uproar they got over Doom.

Man what is up with those guys.

Anyway you have my solidarity on Superman getting his sequel.

STM was and still is my favorite comic book movie ever. t:

 

[Agent 194]

Since we're brining up Superman alot, what do we think about Richard Donner taking over this movie? After all,...his Superman seems to be the text book by which people do superhero movies.

 

[Carp Man]

Since we're brining up Superman alot, what do we think about Richard Donner taking over this movie? After all,...his Superman seems to be the text book by which people do superhero movies.

After the way he got shafted during Superman, I don't think he would come back under any cercumstances, but I would take him over Singer any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. He's the only one who got it right. We wouldn't have gotten the *** Superman if he had done SR. He has respect for the charactor.

 

[Pickle-El]

What does SR have to do with FF2's run?

I'll leave it at this....SR opened at about 52 million dollars first weekend....it disappointed in its first week out. But STILL made it to 200 million dollars going head to head with POTC2 and it's record-breaking first 20 days domestically AND overseas with the World Cup. There is no comparison.

FF2, while being much better than the original, simply didn't have enough to have people coming in. The SS was the reason to see this film. There's too much out there. They should have swallowed their pride and moved this one like they did the first.