Dawn of Justice vs Civil War vs Apocalypse

[Flint Marko]

I never said none of these movies will make more than 1 B. You don´t even read what i write i actually predicted more than 1B for AoU.



You´re just expecting all those movies to keep growing and growing and growing, and breaking records after records, when that doesn´t usually happen for that long in the movie business? It´s not such a great prediction either.

What i´m expecting is for some of these movies to eventually slow down due to the increase of the number of super hero flicks being produced. And the marketing growing doesn´t mean the movies will keep breaking records. Even if the money is there, it doesn´t mean that it will go to the same place as it went past year.

I felt I made it pretty clear but apologies if I didn't, my issue was with you saying all this:

Yap. It might actually gross 1 billion.

AoU - 1.1 B

BvS - 1 B

CW - 900 M

Trust me when I say you need to up your predictions across the board. Come late May/early June you will see what I'm talking about. Even if it doesn't hit 1.5 billion, it'll still get a lot closer than you're predicting.
At this point there's nothing really more I can say, I feel as if me and Sonicradiation have more than made our point. If you don't see what we are saying than there is no further use in trying to convince you.

 

[Killer]

Whatever the number is, i don´t think we will see none of these movies making 1.5 or 2 B dollars. And even if they make those numbers, i really couldn´t care less. Nothing in my life will change. This is just a prediction thread, and i´ve made mine.

Plenty of crappy movies make tons of money, so i won´t be shocked if Marvel flicks keep breaking records. I will watch them regardless, because i enjoy the series. But i doubt they will satisfy me more than BvS.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

But i doubt they will satisfy me more than BvS.

That's the most legitimate thing you've said this whole thread. We of course knew this the minute you came on here all ******** that someone critiqued MoS...It's just amusing it took you 2 + pages with your box office BS just to say what you really wanted.

 

[Killer]

That's the most legitimate thing you've said this whole thread. We of course knew this the minute you came on here all ******** that someone critiqued MoS...It's just amusing it took you 2 + pages with your box office BS just to say what you really wanted.

I think you´re just overdramatizing the whole thing. You seem obsessed. Get a life.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Overdramatizing? I'm not the one who did an unconvincing song and dance for 3 pages. You showed your hand from the start and I was just having fun with it.

 

[Killer]

Overdramatizing? I'm not the one who did an unconvincing song and dance for 3 pages. You showed your hand from the start and I was just having fun with it.

Your song is as unconvincing as mine, since you didn´t really convince me of anything. And yes, overdramatizing. Why would you try to start an argument over the fact that i just said i expect BvS to please me more?

And let´s not forget you were the one looking ******** with my opinion. You quoted me two times before i even answered you. And you tried to start an argument saying that BvS could end up being a "pile of ****", wich it could, but the way you said it just revealed you´re a very confrontational individual looking to start hostilities with anyone who says anything you don´t like.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Your song is as unconvincing as mine, since you didn´t really convince me of anything.

I never thought I could since you clearly had a bias right from the start. I based my arguments on recent indisputable growth trends and you responded with abstract hypotheticals.

And yes, overdramatizing. Why would you try to start an argument over the fact that i just said i expect BfvS to please me more?

I wasn't trying to start an argument, just make a definitive statement. And I quoted the more pacified part of what you said but left out: "Plenty of crappy movies make tons of money, so i won´t be shocked if Marvel flicks keep breaking records...." This sentiment was obviously the driving force for your arguments and why you were never willing to legitimately have an open mind as to why AoU or CW could outperform the Avengers or IM3 at the box office. It was clear as day from the start.

 

[Killer]

I never thought I could since you clearly had a bias right from the start. I based my arguments on recent, undisputable growth trends and you responded with abstract hypotheticals.

Growth trends mean nothing. Plenty of movies have gone against predictions and growth trends. And plenty of genres and franchises have been victims of over-saturation over the decades, even in times where the movie market was growing, so there´s nothing of abstract in predicting that a franchise that´s reaching the 10 movie mark might end up running a little bit out of steam, since that´s not uncommon in the movie universe. You act like your prediction is more logic than mine, but it actually isn´t. What you predicted can happen, but what i predicted can also happen. You don´t have any data at hand that could prove you´re right and i´m wrong, have you? I guess not, so you shoud get out of your high horse.

I wasn't trying to start an argument, just make a definitive statement. And I quoted the more pacified part of what you said but left out: "Plenty of crappy movies make tons of money, so i won´t be shocked if Marvel flicks keep breaking records...." This sentiment was obviously the driving force for your arguments and why you were never willing to legitimately have an open mind as to why AoU or CW could outperform the Avengers or IM3 at the box office.

And you also left out the part where i said i like the series, so i couldn´t really be referring to it as "crappy" could i? If i like it, how can i think it´s crap?

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Growth trends mean nothing.

Oh really? Since you gave me a rudimentary explanation of how "Hollywood works" let me tell you who doesn't think growth trends mean nothing, Hollywood Studios. Particularly ones about to start up "shared universes" of their own.

Plenty of movies have gone against predictions and growth trends.

No kidding. I have never argued against that, you keep bringing it up but don't answer my question as to why you think it will happen in 2015 to AoU, or in 2016 to CW and BvS (de facto Avenger and JL films no less!) Why is it these big, huge, multi-character juggernauts will be affected significantly? Because of SS, Deadpool, Gambit, Strange, etc? Who's to say they won't miss a beat and these new & unproven commodities are the ones who are thrashed out of existence? A lot of speculation and unknown quantities, they could all be smashes as well.

You don´t have any data at hand that could prove you´re right and i´m wrong, have you?

No, I'm just using common sense and arguing for known variables against unknown ones. And round and round we go...

I guess not, so you shoud get out of your high horse.

No, I should get off. You should get out of your trojan one and then beat it....

 

[Killer]

Oh really? Since you gave me a rudimentary explanation of how "Hollywood works" let me tell you who doesn't think growth trends mean nothing, Hollywood Studios. Particularly ones about to start up "shared universes" of their own

It doesn´t matter what Hollywood Studios think. History tells us they´ve been wrong time and time again.

No kidding. I have never argued against that, you keep bringing it up but don't answer my question as to why you think it will happen in 2015 to AoU, or in 2016 to CW and BvS (de facto Avenger and JL films no less!) Why is it these big, huge, multi-character juggernauts will be affected significantly? Because of SS, Deadpool, Gambit, Strange, etc? Who's to say they won't miss a beat and these new unproven commodities are the ones who are thrashed out of existence? A lot of speculation and unknown quantities, they could all be smashes as well.

It´s all speculation. Your opinion is also speculation. I feel the genre doesn´t have enough depth to keep people investing money in it for much longer. The novelty factor is no longer there, we´ve seen a lot of the same, and a lot of the same is coming out in the next couple years, and i just don´t think the level of interest in these movies will keep growing. It will always exist, but i don´t expect records to keep getting broken.

Go take a look at TASM2 boards. Only 3% predicted the movie would make what it actually made. Everyone else was expecting way more. I bet they all based their predictions of the same "indisputable growth trends" as you.

No, I should get off. You should get out of your trojan one and then beat beat it....

I would thank you for correcting me, if you hadn´t done it only to try to make me look bad. But i´m glad you understood what i was trying to say. It´s good to be able to communicate in 5 different languages.

 

[Gusto]

If Fox are smart, they'll really play with the Jean/Scott relationship and pull in the fan girls. That mixed with J-Law... Well well.

 

[Gusto]

And Evan Peters. Lawd.

 

[Tony Stark]

You underestimate the brand that is batman and overestimate the audience's hatred for ben affleck or as you put it polarizing effect that he has on the GA. Gone girl had ben affleck but that did not prevent it from performing well the box office. And i refuse to believe that the TDKR trilogy only performed so well because of christian bale's audience grabbing power.

Apples/Oranges.

I don't underestimate the brand. This could easily be the biggest film of the year, but just because of Superman and Batman, doesn't make it so. Superman Returns did poorly, Batman Begins had a very underwhelming box office, despite being arguably the best Batman movie. Man of Steel started out strong but quickly faded, and there have been more negative comments about that movie from people who normally love Superman, than perhaps any other Superman movie. If Jerry Seinfeld, one of the most open Superman fanboys in Hollywood, doesn't get your film, who does?

Ben Affleck is a good actor, but he is polarizing. He did win alot of respect back for Argo, which was a terrific film and IMO he's a far better director than an actor. Gone girl was one of his better performing films, but Armageddon was his best performing film box office wise.

And no I never said TDK performed well because of Christian Bale. TDK and TDKR performed well because of the reputation of Chris Nolan and people were invested in the series. Heath Ledger fueled TDK far more than Christian Bale did, and Ledger would be the only person in that series who you could compare to a RDJ as far as audience draw.

Again, I'm expressing my opinion that of the three Cap CW, would be the odds on favorite. It's the known entity. Having RDJ as Iron Man will boost the box office, and it will surely finish above TWS. It's got the better release date, as the early May date has fuled the Iron Man films, Avengers, and the Raimi Spider-man films.

That being said, I could see DoJ, topping it, because of the curiosity factor but it would have to be a marginally better picture than MoS was, and Snyder, needs to prove that he's more than a good action director.

 

[Rowsdower!]

I'm not going to pretend that MOS was universally loved, but why is it that the only opinions that seem to matter to anyone are the negative ones, particularly when it comes to celebrities and noteworthy fans? Dan Jurgens liked it. Ethan Van Sciver LOVED it. Harry Knowles really liked it. So Jerry Seinfeld and Mark Waid didn't. Okay, that's fine. But there were plenty of people who did. I know the movie was divisive, but I think people confuse a mixed reaction to a completely negative one.

 

[Killer]

I'm not going to pretend that MOS was universally loved, but why is it that the only opinions that seem to matter to anyone are the negative ones, particularly when it comes to celebrities and noteworthy fans? Dan Jurgens liked it. Ethan Van Sciver LOVED it. Harry Knowles really liked it. So Jerry Seinfeld and Mark Waid didn't. Okay, that's fine. But there were plenty of people who did. I know the movie was divisive, but I think people confuse a mixed reaction to a completely negative one.

I´d say there´s more to it than just numbers and percentages, even though people only pay attention to them. Some movies are just more likely to get critical acceptance than others, and that isn´t always related to the quality of the work itself.

I don´t have any friend who actually likes Superman, for example, so they will never rate a Superman movie that high. Some of them think the character is boring. Others are too attached to the idea that Christopher Reeve is the only real Superman.

When you look at Iron Man, right from the start he doesn´t have to deal with any of these obstacles. It´s a character that most people find funny and interesting. It fits way better the modern times than the "boring" boy scout Superman. There´s also no nostalgic audience comparing RDJ to any previous actor, so the road is naturally easier for Iron Man than for Superman.

I actually think Man of Steel is a better movie than Iron Man. But i can definitely see why one is better accepted than the other, and i always predicted that Man of Steel would be divisive, no matter how good it ended up being.

 

[flickchick85]

The "Boring Boy Scout" issue isn't the problem a lot of people have with MoS, though. Mark Waid, Jerry Seinfeld and Grant Morrison are lifelong Superman fans, and they didn't like it because they didn't think it got the character right. Superman's my favorite superhero and I liked the movie much more than they did, but I do think their points are mostly valid. It didn't exactly "nail" the character, and it didn't really do him justice, imo.

 

[Killer]

The "Boring Boy Scout" issue isn't the problem a lot of people have with MoS, though. Mark Waid, Jerry Seinfeld and Grant Morrison are lifelong Superman fans, and they didn't like it because they didn't think it got the character right. Superman's my favorite superhero and I liked the movie much more than they did, but I do think their points are mostly valid. It didn't exactly "nail" the character, and it didn't really do him justice, imo.

You´re just confirming my point. People have tons of preconceived notions regarding what Superman should or shouldn´t be, and that had an impact in the movie´s critical reception. We can´t say the same about Iron Man, Thor or Captain America. These are fresh incarnations for the general audience. They don´t really have anything to compare it with. I´ve really come accross a pretty decent number of people who have criticized MOS while mentioning Christopher Reeve and the early movies.

I´m not saying these are the only reasons why the movie wasn´t received that well. They certainly aren´t. But they were definitely a factor.

 

[flickchick85]

What? All these characters have existed for decades. They all have fans with preconceived notions. Just because they didn't have movies before doesn't negate the other media that established versions of that character before. Thor fans don't love Thor's MCU portrayal, but that hasn't affected his critical reception. What HAS affected his reception is the mediocre quality of his films. Bale's Batman bore little resemblance to the many Batmen that came before him, but the films were so good it didn't matter and people simply adjusted their expectations of Batman.

As it happens, my own preconceived notions about Superman come from the comics of a specific (more recent) era, as well as the cartoons. That's the reason I never liked the Reeve/Donner movies, and the reason MoS doesn't entirely work for me either. BUT I acknowledge that the first Reeve/Donner film was a very well-made film, so even though I don't like that version of Superman, I can't knock it too much. That's less the case with MoS. I feel like its screenplay is where it loses most of the points with the critics and GA. It's simply not a very well-written film, imo, regardless of its interpretation of its hero. If the film were better, how close he was to everyone's "expected" interpretation of the character wouldn't have mattered.

 

[Killer]

It´s not the same thing. It´s not the same thing at all. Everybody knows who Superman is and everybody has watched Superman movies. Most people probably didn´t even know very well who Thor was before the movie. There are people with preconceived notions regarding ALL those characters, but you can´t seriously suggest that the amount of people that has a specific vision of Superman is the same as the amount of people who had a specific vision of Thor or Iron Man. It´s just not the same thing. One is an iconic figure with a very well established image in the public eye, the others weren´t.

The only way you could possible compare Iron Man to Superman is if 15 years from now, some new actor plays Iron Man, in a movie with a completely different tone from this first trilogy. Then you will see how preconceived notions can actually impact the reception of a movie.

 

[flickchick85]

It´s not the same thing. It´s not the same thing at all. Everybody knows who Superman is and everybody has watched Superman movies. Most people probably didn´t even know very well who Thor was before the movie. There are people with preconceived notions regarding ALL those characters, but you can´t seriously suggest that the amount of people that has a specific vision of Superman is the same as the amount of people who had a specific vision of Thor or Iron Man. It´s just not the same thing. One is an iconic figure with a very well established image in the public eye, the others weren´t.

The only way you could possible compare Iron Man to Superman is if 15 years from now, some new actor plays Iron Man, in a movie with a completely different tone from this first trilogy. Then you will see how preconceived notions can actually impact the reception of a movie.

I've already seen it - with TASM. Which just so happens to be my favorite Spider-man film. And while preconceived notions may have had a slight influence on its critical reception, they still weren't far off. The criticisms of the film AS A FILM were still valid. Just as the ones of MoS were, imo.

 

[Black Narcissus]

Eh, I'm eagerly excited for all three. Lawd.

 

[Killer]

I've already seen it - with TASM. Which just so happens to be my favorite Spider-man film. And while preconceived notions may have had a slight influence on its critical reception, they still weren't far off. The criticisms of the film AS A FILM were still valid. Just as the ones of MoS were, imo.

The difference is that Tobey Maguire was Spider-Man in the public eye for 10 years. Christopher Reeve was the ultimate Superman that everyone likes and remembers for over 30 years. And Maguire was never close to be as iconic as Reeve. Still, you can´t really say that those comparisions and preconceptions didn´t impact the way the movies were received. I´ve seen plenty of people bringing up the Raimi films while criticizing TASM. Pleeenty.

Another reason why this isn´t a very fair comparision is because MOS is much more different from the 78 version than TASM is from the Raimi films. I´ve had strong feelings of deja vu while whatching both TASM, because they aren´t really bringing anything very new to the table.

Now compare STM with MOS. 30 years a part from each other. They look and feel soooo different. Everything is shockingly different. It´s perfectly normal for someone who grew up watching Christopher Reeve to look at MoS and think "naaa, this is not the Superman i knew and grew up with".

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

It's also perfectly reasonable for a whole bunch of people in the GA to care less about Reeves and Maguire and just think MoS and the TASM series weren't very good movies. To Flickchicks point.

 

[Killer]

It's also perfectly reasonable for a whole bunch of people in the GA to care less about Reeves and Maguire and just think MoS and the TASM series weren't very good movies. To Flickchicks point.

But the reality is that it did have an impact on the way the movie was received. I can´t tell how big of a factor it was, neither can you, but it was definitely a factor.

 

[Visualiza]

The difference is that Tobey Maguire was Spider-Man in the public eye for 10 years. Christopher Reeve was the ultimate Superman that everyone likes and remembers for over 30 years. And Maguire was never close to be as iconic as Reeve. Still, you can´t really say that those comparisions and preconceptions didn´t impact the way the movies were received. I´ve seen plenty of people bringing up the Raimi films while criticizing TASM. Pleeenty.

Another reason why this isn´t a very fair comparision is because MOS is much more different from the 78 version than TASM is from the Raimi films. I´ve had strong feelings of deja vu while whatching both TASM, because they aren´t really bringing anything very new to the table.

Now compare STM with MOS. 30 years a part from each other. They look and feel soooo different. Everything is shockingly different. It´s perfectly normal for someone who grew up watching Christopher Reeve to look at MoS and think "naaa, this is not the Superman i knew and grew up with".

Man of Steel repeated a lot of the same plot beats and concepts as Superman '78, especially those that originated in the Donner movie and not the comics.