Dear WB, your supposed 2009 blockbusters continue to fail...

[KalMart]

Well, nintendo, myself and many others think differently than you, and no matter what you say, we are not going to change our minds. We like what we like, just like you, Kalmart. You really seem to want to change people's minds..

No, I have no intention or desire to change your mind at all. Simply posting my outlook the same as you are. Are you looking to change anyone's mind? Or are you just bothered that someone else doesn't share your outlook?


But just consider this......if this wasn't your favorite character or what have you....say it was some other comic character....and they were looking to reboot....wouldn't you think a new lead would help in rebooting/restarting the whole thing? And I actually liked Routh as Superman. But what I find more important is starting from scratch with no preconceptions when it comes to a reboot. It lets the audience take everything in from there on forward, instead of adjusting with the reminder that the lead actor is the same as the other story....and you'd like to forget that there was another story altogether if this is a reboot. I think the importance of the film/franchise from there forward outweighs sentimental attachment to the former actor. They not only have to shake Routh/Singer...but also Reeve/Donner as well. the less they have to associate with that, the better off they'll be as a new start.

So I'm not trying to change your mind, it's just that we seem to differ on what's most important for whatever new Superman movie is to come.

 

[BestGirl]

I think is the hype and the excitement of a new Terminator movie and seeing it on the big screen that so many people are praising it right now. But IMO in a couple of months fans will realise it was as bad as T3 ( haven't seen the movie,though). Something similar happened with Spider - man 3 and FF2, when they were just realeased people were loving those films, at the spidey forums some were even saying it was the best of the trilogy and giving it 9 and 10.

I've heard SR got a similar reaction on these boards.

But SR was released 3 years ago!!!! And we are still talking about it the same way, there's no ending. IMO the only way this will be over is if they announce a reboot with Brandon Routh on the leading role. That way people that hated the movie probably will get the film they wanted and the ones who loved it, at least get to see Routh again. At least Iknow I would be happy.

I would like a Routhboot but I don't think that's what we're going to get.

 

[KalMart]

At the same time....what people are saying here has as much influence or relevance to the next Superman movie as.....well.....Terminator Salvation does.

 

[BestGirl]

At the same time....what people are saying here has as much influence or relevance to the next Superman movie as.....well.....Terminator Salvation does.

I don't think many people here believe what we say will impact the next movie. It's just fun to share opinions on Superman.

 

[GreenKToo]

I wouldnt mind Routh back in a reboot, but I do think it would be best to get a new actor in the role.

The GA won't be following the new film on the internet like we will be, waiting for every single little tidbit of info to be released. They will have no idea if it's a reboot, sequel, prequel, or whatever. Why wouldnt they think it was a sequel with routh there tho.

I mean do we really wanna be sitting here (again) after the reboot, wondering why its not getting a sequel either? I say give it the best chance(s) possible to succeed. And if that means a new actor in the role of Superman, then so be it.
I sometimes wonder if some folks are more of a fan of the actor than the actual character.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

What does Terminator: Salvation being a box-office under-performer mean to the Superman franchise? At the end of the day, it makes WB increasingly appreciate the fact that Returns was still able to churn out $200 million when Salvation will struggle to hit $120 million and Watchmen barely got past $100 million.

So do you think this might give Superman more of an opening for 2011 now?

Is it possible? Sure. Is it probable? Doubtful.

 

[Ita-KalEl]

What does Terminator: Salvation being a box-office under-performer mean to the Superman franchise? At the end of the day, it makes WB increasingly appreciate the fact that Returns was still able to churn out $200 million when Salvation will struggle to hit $120 million and Watchmen barely got past $100 million.



Is it possible? Sure. Is it probable? Doubtful.

I agree with you.

 

[Matt]

Granted we already know you have no idea what you're talking about. That said, T4 opened not only below projections but also less than T3 did six years ago. Add to that the mixed-to-negative word of mouth and the drop-off next weekend will be 60%+ and that's being conservative.

This franchise is terminated.

Fixed. Sorry couldn't resist

 

[dark_b]

ha ha ha ha

 

[Matt]

Exactly!

Let's try to keep it related to the next Superman film. I hope TS poor performance leads to WB giving more effort to Superman, since it appears one of their 2011 tentpoles is now a bust

But right now there is no script, no director, no cast, no crew, no sets, etc. Could the studio really get this out by 2011 without rushing the hell out of it? And wouldn't that effect quality? I'd rather they do a Superman movie right than say, "Hey! We have no Summer 2011 tentpole! Lets throw together a quick Superman movie!"

Besides, Warners DOES have a 2011 tentpole. A movie that will likely be the biggest of the summer. The FINAL Harry Potter movie. If they want another one, I think their best move at this point would be to really try to push Batman 3 forward. Its not as effects driven so post-production shouldn't take as long and they already have sets, I assume. Plus I'm guessing that a script has been kicking around the Nolan brothers heads (and maybe an outline is already on paper) for awhile now.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Besides, Warners DOES have a 2011 tentpole. A movie that will likely be the biggest of the year. The FINAL Harry Potter movie.

Fixed.

 

[dark_b]

Matt i am no expert but i think no matter what .....the superman movie will come out when WB will not have a specific tentpole movie in some summer.

 

[Superark]

What does Terminator: Salvation being a box-office under-performer mean to the Superman franchise? At the end of the day, it makes WB increasingly appreciate the fact that Returns was still able to churn out $200 million when Salvation will struggle to hit $120 million and Watchmen barely got past $100 million.



Is it possible? Sure. Is it probable? Doubtful.

I know before you were saying/guessing the next Superman film might come out in 2011. I guess that has changed. So are you now of the assumption that 2012 is the target or is that wishful thinking too?

 

[Matt]

Fixed.

Touche.

 

[Superark]

But right now there is no script, no director, no cast, no crew, no sets, etc. Could the studio really get this out by 2011 without rushing the hell out of it? And wouldn't that effect quality? I'd rather they do a Superman movie right than say, "Hey! We have no Summer 2011 tentpole! Lets throw together a quick Superman movie!"

Besides, Warners DOES have a 2011 tentpole. A movie that will likely be the biggest of the summer. The FINAL Harry Potter movie. If they want another one, I think their best move at this point would be to really try to push Batman 3 forward. Its not as effects driven so post-production shouldn't take as long and they already have sets, I assume. Plus I'm guessing that a script has been kicking around the Nolan brothers heads (and maybe an outline is already on paper) for awhile now.

Well at this point I guess I'm not expecting them to turn out a Superman movie in 2011. But if WB wanted a quality Superman movie (and actually the next one will be smaller in terms of production and budget) out by summer 2011, they could. Remember Singer made his pitch for Superman in the summer of 2004 and we got a movie in summer 2006. So it can be done if WB was given a pitch

But you made a great point about Harry Potter. I forgot about that movie.

 

[Matt]

By the way guys, I think if there is going to be an effect caused by the recent big budget failures such as Wolvie, Watchmen, and Terminator, I think studios are going to be looking at Taken, not another big budget disappointment. Taken was a movie that was made for piss cheap, and has grossed nearly 150 million domestically, another 75 mil internationally, has outgrossed Watchmen, and stands a chance of outgrossing Terminator. I can't help but think studios are going to start leaning towards going back to making smaller budget, smaller scale, traditional action movies and try to emulate Taken's success.

 

[Excel]

Basically, 2013 or 2014- whichever year doesnt have a Green Lantern Sequel planned - is the best bet for the next Supes film, and thats a reach at that.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Green Lantern sequel? Granted nobody takes you seriously any way, but still.... The studio is casting the first film right now and has major hurtles ahead of them for that production. So it's way too early to be talking (or in your case; assuming out of your rear-end) about Green Lantern II.

As for Batman III, it's nowhere near "the sure thing" many keep saying it is. That is to say there will be a third Batman installment and it will most-likely have Christian Bale in the cape and cowl again. Everything beyond that (including the release date, whether or not Nolan is coming back, etc.) is big question-mark.

Personally, I think Nolan is coming back and it'll be 2012. At the same time, I could imagine it coming a year or so later than that only if Nolan really wants to take his sweet-ass time developing it. And by the way Warner Brothers has been patient with him so far, it's not that far-fetched - although I doubt that happens.

 

[Matt]

Green Lantern sequel? Granted nobody takes you seriously any way, but still.... The studio is casting the first film right now and has major hurtles ahead of them for that production. So it's way too early to be talking (or in your case; assuming out of your rear-end) about Green Lantern II.

As for Batman III, it's nowhere near "the sure thing" many keep saying it is. That is to say there will be a third Batman installment and it will most-likely have Christian Bale in the cape and cowl again. Everything beyond that (including the release date, whether or not Nolan is coming back, etc.) is big question-mark.

Personally, I think Nolan is coming back and it'll be 2012. At the same time, I could imagine it coming a year or so later than that only if Nolan really wants to take his sweet-ass time developing it. And by the way Warner Brothers has been patient with him so far, it's not that far-fetched - although I doubt that happens.

Which is why, IMO, Warners should just throw an ungodly amount of money at Nolan to convince him to get off his ass and make it for 2011. Will money buy convince him to move? Who knows, but it would be nice to have something alongside Potter.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

WB is probably thinking to themselves, "We've got Potter for the summer. So we're good to go overall!" Of course, they'll want 2-3 tentpoles to represent each of the "big" months for the Summer box-office.

As for Batman III, there's no way for it to be realistically churned out for 2011 if Nolan is going do it. He's already up to his eyeballs on Inception for July 2010 (which I personally think will be pushed back to later in the Fall, but maybe that's just me!)

 

[Superark]

WB is probably thinking to themselves, "We've got Potter for the summer. So we're good to go overall!" Of course, they'll want 2-3 tentpoles to represent each of the "big" months for the Summer box-office.

As for Batman III, there's no way for it to be realistically churned out for 2011 if Nolan is going do it. He's already up to his eyeballs on Inception for July 2010 (which I personally think will be pushed back to later in the Fall, but maybe that's just me!)

So I guess that means no Superman in the next few years. That sucks!

 

[Showtime]

Watchmen and Terminator obviously didn't perform well against their budgets. There will now not be a Terminator sequel because this movie is not going to even come close to it's budget.

That being said it is all about perception. Star Trek will probably end up making between 220 Million - 230 Million domestically, if not more. The budget for Star Trek was around 218 Million. Let's say Star Trek makes 220 Million, that is only 2 million more than it's budget and overseas it is not doing gangbusters. It will end up making less than Superman Returns WW.

Perception.

In regards to WB, I believe WB has "won the year" at the box office in both 2007 and 2008, I'd have to double check. Despite the not so successful run of Watchmen and soon to be not so successful run of Terminator, WB has a good chance to win the year again.

I am still at the same point I have been for many months. WB WANTS to make a Superman movie sometime soon, but they don't NEED to.

 

[Wiseman]

By the way guys, I think if there is going to be an effect caused by the recent big budget failures such as Wolvie, Watchmen, and Terminator, I think studios are going to be looking at Taken, not another big budget disappointment. Taken was a movie that was made for piss cheap, and has grossed nearly 150 million domestically, another 75 mil internationally, has outgrossed Watchmen, and stands a chance of outgrossing Terminator. I can't help but think studios are going to start leaning towards going back to making smaller budget, smaller scale, traditional action movies and try to emulate Taken's success.

I concur

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

By the way guys, I think if there is going to be an effect caused by the recent big budget failures such as Wolvie, Watchmen, and Terminator, I think studios are going to be looking at Taken, not another big budget disappointment. Taken was a movie that was made for piss cheap, and has grossed nearly 150 million domestically, another 75 mil internationally, has outgrossed Watchmen, and stands a chance of outgrossing Terminator. I can't help but think studios are going to start leaning towards going back to making smaller budget, smaller scale, traditional action movies and try to emulate Taken's success.

They already are, I believe. The box-office successes of Taken, Grand Torino, Valkyrie, Slumdog Millionaire, etc. has finally dawned on studio executives that, "Hey people over the 18-39 male demographic actually go to the movies too! Who woulda thunk it?!?" ****in morons.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Watchmen and Terminator obviously didn't perform well against their budgets. There will now not be a Terminator sequel because this movie is not going to even come close to it's budget.

That being said it is all about perception. Star Trek will probably end up making between 220 Million - 230 Million domestically, if not more. The budget for Star Trek was around 218 Million. Let's say Star Trek makes 220 Million, that is only 2 million more than it's budget and overseas it is not doing gangbusters. It will end up making less than Superman Returns WW.

Perception.

In regards to WB, I believe WB has "won the year" at the box office in both 2007 and 2008, I'd have to double check. Despite the not so successful run of Watchmen and soon to be not so successful run of Terminator, WB has a good chance to win the year again.

I am still at the same point I have been for many months. WB WANTS to make a Superman movie sometime soon, but they don't NEED to.