Green Lantern Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 2

[chiefchirpa]

GL is in the 5th place (behind Penguins for crying out loud) and falling fast. Still think WB will push through a sequel no matter how bad the box office numbers end up, but other SH like Flash and WW may not see their movie released in the forseeable future. This will definitely curtail WB's plans to rely on their stable of SH to succeed Harry Potter as movie franchises.

Not a chance. Flash and WW are the next priority. GL had its chance and it blew it because the tech was still too expensive to hoist a proper film. The sequel is another proposition for another 200 million budget.

Flash and WW could carry a cheaper money load. It's a basic superhero film and sword & sandal film. Has to be cheaper than a space-themed superhero.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Not a chance. Flash and WW are the next priority. GL had its chance and it blew it because the tech was still too expensive to hoist a proper film. The sequel is another proposition for another 200 million budget.

Flash and WW could carry a cheaper money load. It's a basic superhero film and sword & sandal film. Has to be cheaper than a space-themed superhero.

I seriously doubt we'd get a swords and sandals type WW film. To the studio execs it just does not compute

 

[Saitou Hajime]

I dont think so if a super hero film is good it does good thats the way I look at it 2-3 superhero films thats nothing compared to the amount of terrible rom coms and kids film.

Pretty much. If anything, all Marvel's efforts are going to do IMO is make DD/FF/GR tier obsolete and make the Big Two, Marvel, and X-Men tiers the standard.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Ah, bitter of what exactly?

He's making a judgment based on your avy. You should judge him back based on his avy.

 

[chiefchirpa]

This movie is more & more likely to be $115 million domestic and 80 million out of the US. Ergo around 200 million WW.

Blame is not solely on the movie quality, but the competitions for 3D screens and plain 2D screens are relentless.

 

[jmc]

I dont think so if a super hero film is good it does good thats the way I look at it 2-3 superhero films thats nothing compared to the amount of terrible rom coms and kids film.

Difference being superheroes are a far more fragile genre than rom coms or kids films, there's always a market for those type of movies, superheroes depend on bringing people from outside of the small market it has. 2-3 superheroes films every is too many, you need to give some breathing room, you can't afford to flood the market otherwise the novelty wears off. Rom coms will still be around in abundance 10-20 years from now, superheroes are less likely to survive.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Difference being superheroes are a far more fragile genre than rom coms or kids films, there's always a market for those type of movies, superheroes depend on bringing people from outside of the small market it has. 2-3 superheroes films every is too many, you need to give some breathing room, you can't afford to flood the market otherwise the novelty wears off. Rom coms will still be around in abundance 10-20 years from now, superheroes are less likely to survive.

Agreed.

I don't know why it's so hard to admit that this glut of Superhero films aren't going to last forever? Nothing lasts forever in the movie biz. Superhero films will more likely than not always be made but there won't always be this mad rush to make them.

All of the A-listers have been used up, alot of the movies are samey and those facts will cause a downward trend. The studios will still make them but they aren't going to be greenlighting any and everything like they are now.

 

[Lighthouse]

I seriously doubt we'd get a swords and sandals type WW film. To the studio execs it just does not compute

I'd be surprised if we get any kind of WW film.

 

[EML420]

Difference being superheroes are a far more fragile genre than rom coms or kids films, there's always a market for those type of movies, superheroes depend on bringing people from outside of the small market it has. 2-3 superheroes films every is too many, you need to give some breathing room, you can't afford to flood the market otherwise the novelty wears off. Rom coms will still be around in abundance 10-20 years from now, superheroes are less likely to survive.

I get what your saying I guess a bit of bias on my part in a sense action movies have died off by that. I mean like the 80s and 90s type of action movies we still get them but there best days are gone I think next year is when were really gonna see if these movies last I belive they will but what ever.

 

[super85]

GL hasn't opened in Europe, well besides Great-Brittain, so its hard to guess how much it will make worldwide. But yes, if it doesn't do great in any market, its hard to think that it will do great here either.

 

[merced]

Pretty much. If anything, all Marvel's efforts are going to do IMO is make DD/FF/GR tier obsolete and make the Big Two, Marvel, and X-Men tiers the standard.

I see 4 tiers:

Top is Spiderman, Batman and Ironman - films making north of 600 million WW.

Second tier is X-Men, Thos, probably captain America - films making between 450 million and 650 million WW.

Third tier are films making 350 million - 450 million. Wolverine, Superman. If Wolverine is released in 12/12 this will be an interesting battle to watch as both franchises are 3rd tier.

Lowest tier - under 350 million WW. GL, Hulk, FF.

I dunno if the lowest tier will be made obsolete - just that this type of film will probably be getting 100 million budgets in he future.

Marvel clearly owns the top 2 tiers and I can't see Superman or any other DC characters breaking into the top 2. My guess is MOS will do about 450 million WW which would put it on the cusp of being a second tier franchise.

 

[Docker2.0]

I know this is old news but man is she right!

http://www.**************.com/fansi..._Waller_To_Be_DCs_Answer_To_Marvels_Nick_Fury

WB/DC is run by a bunch of chimps in suits! Noone is thinking. I've said this numerous times, if you tied GL with TDK or even MOS, there is no question it would have helped it's box office. For them to say that their characters are "to big" to be in a shared universe is closed minded and pathetic! I guess the JLA doesn't exist huh. Again, it's their plan but I don't see this working out for them in the long run. I'm a Marvel guy and I'm wearing a condom for when the Avengers come out(no pun intended)I'm going to have the biggest geekasm one can imagine but even I have to admit that a JLA would make more than an Avengers movie if done right. But with WB/DC track record I highly doubt that they could. Without tying the movies together, the WB has easily missed $30M off of GL's tally.

 

[Iron_Stark]

He's making a judgment based on your avy. You should judge him back based on his avy.

No, I was making a judgement based on all of his posts on this thread and others.

 

[Docker2.0]

No, I was making a judgement based on all of his posts on this thread and others.

C'mon man! You can't make any negative post about a DC movie with a Marvel avatar. You will then be labeled a fanboy or troll. Didn't you get the memo? Guess where that quote is from?

 

[dark_b]

Then why are the actors signed on for an Avengers trilogy?

they are signed IF they would do it.

 

[dark_b]

I know this is old news but man is she right!

http://www.**************.com/fansi..._Waller_To_Be_DCs_Answer_To_Marvels_Nick_Fury

WB/DC is run by a bunch of chimps in suits! Noone is thinking. I've said this numerous times, if you tied GL with TDK or even MOS, there is no question it would have helped it's box office. For them to say that their characters are "to big" to be in a shared universe is closed minded and pathetic! I guess the JLA doesn't exist huh. Again, it's their plan but I don't see this working out for them in the long run. I'm a Marvel guy and I'm wearing a condom for when the Avengers come out(no pun intended)I'm going to have the biggest geekasm one can imagine but even I have to admit that a JLA would make more than an Avengers movie if done right. But with WB/DC track record I highly doubt that they could. Without tying the movies together, the WB has easily missed $30M off of GL's tally.

general public doesnt care about this stuff. if the trailers and word of mouth is good then they will pay money.

 

[HighFivingMF]

they are signed IF they would do it.

No ****. But they wouldn't include it if Avengers was supposed to be a one-off thing when they could sign them to appear in more solo movies or cameo appearances.

 

[merced]

they are signed IF they would do it.

They are signed is the bottom line so the intention is to do sequels. Especially if this is a top-tier megahit which is likely.

RR was signed for sequels too.

It's standard practice.

Though Cavill has not been reported on as being signed for a sequel. Usually this info comes out so it's a bit curious in Cavill's case.

 

[Docker2.0]

general public doesnt care about this stuff. if the trailers and word of mouth is good then they will pay money.

You'd be surprised! Honestly, I believe it helped Thor out big time. Co-workers of mine(who don't know the difference between Marvel and DC) knew about Thor because of the after credit scene of Ironman 2 and they are now stoked to see the Avengers next summer. I'm sure before Cap comes out you will see some scene on a commercial tying him to Thor and Ironman as well. It's tying the product together that will sell it. GL was a tough sell anyway(though not as tough as WB made it)so they should have tied it with Batman and Superman to give it a leg up.

 

[merced]

general public doesnt care about this stuff. if the trailers and word of mouth is good then they will pay money.

The refusal of WB to cross-pollinate it's franchises is baffling.

It's the same mentality that says if we do a JL the Batman film actor can't be in it.

WB can't afford another huge disappointment so I agree with those above that and Flash and WW aren't coming soon.

It seems inevitable they will have to do a JL. But if Avengers is massive next year that may scare them off.

My guess is there will be no super-hero flick from WB in 2013. In 2014 maybe a rebooted Batman. That seems to be the only WB franchise on the front-burner and being fast tracked right now.

 

[merced]

You'd be surprised! Honestly, I believe it helped Thor out big time. Co-workers of mine(who don't know the difference between Marvel and DC) knew about Thor because of the after credit scene of Ironman 2 and they are now stoked to see the Avengers next summer. I'm sure before Cap comes out you will see some scene on a commercial tying him to Thor and Ironman as well. It's tying the product together that will sell it. GL was a tough sell anyway(though not as tough as WB made it)so they should have tied it with Batman and Superman to give it a leg up.

Ye they should have tied it to Bats. Superman? No. After Returns and given the general ambivalence toards Supes that tie-in probably would have hurt more than helped.

 

[Docker2.0]

Ye they should have tied it to Bats. Superman? No. After Returns and given the general ambivalence toards Supes that tie-in probably would have hurt more than helped.

No I meant MOS. I wouldn't tie a dead roach to Superman Returns.

 

[TheVileOne]

I think Docker2.0 makes a good point actually. I mean, I'm not sure how much we can credit the extent but I don't see how it was going to hurt.

As I stated earlier, I was always put off the way DC Ent. acts like they can't do this but they won't actually come out and say no we aren't doing it this way because they are afraid of upsetting the fans. Lame.

 

[The Sage]

The refusal of WB to cross-pollinate it's franchises is baffling.

It's the same mentality that says if we do a JL the Batman film actor can't be in it.

WB can't afford another huge disappointment so I agree with those above that and Flash and WW aren't coming soon.

It seems inevitable they will have to do a JL. But if Avengers is massive next year that may scare them off.

My guess is there will be no super-hero flick from WB in 2013. In 2014 maybe a rebooted Batman. That seems to be the only WB franchise on the front-burner and being fast tracked right now.

It's better to keep the franchises separate as it allows for greater depth and exploration into each character's mythos without trying make sure they fit into the same world.

 

[Poni_Boy]

It's better to keep the franchises separate as it allows for greater depth and exploration into each character's mythos without trying make sure they fit into the same world.

If that was the reason for it I would understand. But it's not. It's a business move (and a smart one) so they don't have to put all their eggs into one cinematic basket. WB sees it as too much of a risk, since combining the franchises means each associated film has to succeed. One flop (Green Lantern) would tumble the entire house of cards.

If WB are still planning on moving ahead with this separate franchise idea then I personally think they should A) shelve a JLA movie till the other independent franchises are done or B) not include any heroes that already have screen presences in those franchises.