Green Lantern Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 2

[Bruce Malone]

Why are people discussing a MOS sequel? from what I understand DC loses the rights after 2013. Everyone on the other forums here seem to be in agreement with that that MOS is more or less a one off film.


Also as for Returns budget wasn't 270 million the figure that was floated around?

 

[KalMart]

Why are people discussing a MOS sequel? from what I understand DC loses the rights after 2013. Everyone on the other forums here seem to be in agreement with that that MOS is more or less a one off film.


Also as for Returns budget wasn't 270 million the figure that was floated around?

After adding on the costs of prior 'failed attempts', yeah.

 

[kedrell]

Perception most certainly plays a factor.

Both Superman Returns and Star Trek were made for roughly the same amount of dough (around $220-$240 million - FYI never take the "official" budgets studios list to heart. Ever. Or anything off Box Office Mojo.) and both did roughly the same amount of business worldwide (around $400 million). But the latter was considered the huge, brawling success and the former was viewed as an under-performer.

Well yes, I know that we can never be sure about the budgets for films(Hollywood accounting and all that) but frankly, what else can we go by? We rarely get marketing $ info(GL's marketing numbers getting out is unusual). It seems we either accept the numbers given on sites like BOM or just remain in the dark unless some entertainment reporter happens to get a scoop that sheds more light on the matter.

 

[rnewbz]

I was under the understanding that DC doesn't loose the rights to superman, they loose the rights to elements of his origins such as Krypton and his parents and that's as of now with further court cases sure to follow.

 

[KalMart]

Perception most certainly plays a factor.

Both Superman Returns and Star Trek were made for roughly the same amount of dough (around $220-$240 million - FYI never take the "official" budgets studios list to heart. Ever. Or anything off Box Office Mojo.) and both did roughly the same amount of business worldwide (around $400 million). But the latter was considered the huge, brawling success and the former was viewed as an under-performer.

Because the latter was perceived as a better movie that presented an engaging beginning to a new ongoing saga, instead of a sullen end to an old one.

 

[TheIncredibleSk]

People WB's loses certain aspects of Superman not the whole character. MOS will not be a one off if successful.

 

[Silver Surfer]

People WB's loses certain aspects of Superman not the whole character. MOS will not be a one off if successful.

The lose the name "Superman", Lois, Jimmy, Perry, Daily Planet and Krypton.

 

[TheIncredibleSk]

Im not hearing they lose the Superman name its self. But the other thing they do lose. This is all a moot point though. Neither side is gonna win so they'll have to settle eventually or they'll lose money.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Im not hearing they lose the Superman name its self. But the other thing they do lose. This is all a moot point though. Neither side is gonna win so they'll have to settle eventually or they'll lose money.

No I think the name is def at stake and for settling out of court, I doubt it considering the SS family's lawyer is now involved as a rights owner. This will drag on for years.

 

[TheIncredibleSk]

I dont think the name is at stake but we could be seeing two Supermans running around.

 

[Silver Surfer]

I dont think the name is at stake but we could be seeing two Supermans running around.

I remember reading an article on IGN a lil' while back I think, it said that after 2013 DC can't use the name Superman but can have a character who can fly around with the same personality and environment. There was also word that WB took that into consideration when deciding on MOS for the title of the movie.

 

[KalMart]

Im not hearing they lose the Superman name its self. But the other thing they do lose. This is all a moot point though. Neither side is gonna win so they'll have to settle eventually or they'll lose money.

WB will lose more money...but then...they also have more money, and more capability to make money. In gross dollars, it'll hurt a billionaire more to lose millions than it would a peasant to lose hundreds. But if the latter only HAS hundreds...well....

The real 'tragedy', with the heirs' lawyer having ownership interest...is that the heirs could still end up starving to death as the lawyer and WB continue litigating over things.

 

[KalMart]

I remember reading an article on IGN a lil' while back I think, it said that after 2013 DC can't use the name Superman but can have a character who can fly around with the same personality and environment. There was also word that WB took that into consideration when deciding on MOS for the title of the movie.

The whole 'Man Of Steel', costume change, and rumored breakup with Lois may be WB/DC's way of sending a message that they'll find a way of moving on with their 'half'. Sure, it may result in only a 20% endorsement compared to before...but they may be okay with that 20% compared to the heirs/lawyer's 100% of diddly-squat.

 

[Silver Surfer]

The whole 'Man Of Steel', costume change, and rumored breakup with Lois may be WB/DC's way of sending a message that they'll find a way of moving on with their 'half'. Sure, it may result in only a 20% endorsement compared to before...but they may be okay with that 20% compared to the heirs/lawyer's 100% of diddly-squat.

True, I think that also played a part in DC deciding to reboot their whole universe in the comics. Preemptive damage control is prolly on their minds right now.

 

[Octoberist]

I think the main reason why the origins will be explored in MoSbis ecause it might e the last time ever we will ever see a proper Superman origins pre-legal woes.

 

[KalMart]

True, I think that also played a part in DC deciding to reboot their whole universe in the comics. Preemptive damage control is prolly on their minds right now.

You won't have to worry about other characters calling him "Superman" if you reboot them as characters that never called him that to begin with.

What's his alter ego's name...Ken Clarkson?

I think the main reason why the origins will be explored in MoSbis ecause it might e the last time ever we will ever see a proper Superman origins pre-legal woes.

Maybe also why they're treating it as a movie with no connection/carryover to a future Justice League movie.

 

[KalMart]

Wait...this is a GL thread.





Rebooting....!

 

[Silver Surfer]

All this talk is making me sad, Supes is my 2nd fav charter after Spidey. And he's about to be butchered.

 

[chiefchirpa]

I dont think the name is at stake but we could be seeing two Supermans running around.

One Superman with the family, perhaps loaned to Dark Horse or Image. The other "Superman" is without the name Supername & Clark Kent, and can't wear the familiar costume.

 

[chiefchirpa]

You won't have to worry about other characters calling him "Superman" if you reboot them as characters that never called him that to begin with.

What's superior than "Super"? Can't name him Ultraman I suppose.

Shazam (eh, Cap Marvel) and Icon needs to be utilized, stat. Backlash toward the S & S family from angry aging Superman fans is also projected.

 

[KalMart]

What's superior than "Super"? Can't name him Ultraman I suppose.

Shazam (eh, Cap Marvel) and Icon needs to be utilized, stat. Backlash toward the S & S family from angry aging Superman fans is also projected.

Just call him Man Of Steel.

One Superman with the family, perhaps loaned to Dark Horse or Image.

Who can't fly or fight villains like Luthor and Braniac with the Justice League....

The other "Superman" is without the name Supername & Clark Kent, and can't wear the familiar costume.

...and one who can.

 

[Silver Surfer]

One Superman with the family, perhaps loaned to Dark Horse or Image. The other "Superman" is without the name Supername & Clark Kent, and can't wear the familiar costume.

I was thinking about that the other day and I wondered if Marvel would make a play for the rights, a loan or otherwise.

 

[Octoberist]

marvel would never buyout Superman because they too respect DC too much. Also they have enough characters already.

 

[chiefchirpa]

I was thinking about that the other day and I wondered if Marvel would make a play for the rights, a loan or otherwise.

Marvel won't get a property that it can't permanently control.

It may resuscitate Sentry and/or utilize more other super characters though - including Thor, Silver Surfer, Hyperion and Gladiator.

 

[KalMart]

marvel would never buyout Superman because they too respect DC too much. Also they have enough characters already.

I don't think anyone's going to want to touch such damaged goods...and have to pay WB's enormous asking price just to let him fly.

The only thing the heirs could do if they don't strike a deal with WB is maybe sell some autographed copies of Action Comics #1 on ebay......under their Lawyer's account.