Superman Returns How Horn and Robinov justify that SR is a FLOP

[Kid_Kaos]

In a new article by the NY Times, Jeff Robinov and Alan Horn justify the WB bombs of this summer in a very weird way. Read and laugh:

"If Superman had done twice what it did, the whole summer would have looked different," said Mr. Robinov. "It's as much about perception as reality. Even with the failure of a movie like 'Poseidon,' we've had much smaller movies we've lost as much on." Mr. Horn agreed. "I've seen movies that cost $15 million lose as much as $20 million," he said. "But when event movies don't perform well, it is very high profile."

The Defamer took a comedic look at it and explains the situation as follows:

It's a point well-taken, for any hack studio exec can easily fritter away tens of millions of dollars promoting the megabudgeted revival of a supposedly-can't-miss superhero franchise like Superman, but it takes a true visionary to select just the right $15 million labor of love on which to suffer an eight-figure loss.

--> Expect more fun to come when the DVD "hits". t:

>>> UPDATE: Jump to page 3 to read the full article!​

 

[GarudA]

What more excuses will they come up with next? What blame the movies poor BO on the "Superman Curse"

 

[Kid_Kaos]

What more excuses will they come up with next? What blame the movies poor BO on the "Superman Curse"

Nah, it's "the Curse of the Black Pearl"!

I wonder how dumb you have to be to come up with such an excuse?

I can already foresee the talk in the WB Headquarters:
Horn/Robinov: "Look, don't forget that we produced many more failures, not just "Poseidon" and "Superman Returns"!!!"
WB Heads and Stockholders: "Oh, well if it's THAT miserable you can stay, of course. If it was only Superman and Poseidon you burned our money with we would fire you on the spot!"

Funny logic, isn't it!? t:

 

[Dr. Fate]

What more excuses will they come up with next? What blame the movies poor BO on the "Superman Curse"

hehehehehehe

 

[bud7486]

Who is horn and robinov, are they WB execs? If so this is a renig on a previous statement by both the WB and Legendary that SR would be profitable.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

SR isn't a flop, but it damn sure isn't sucessful at the boxoffice.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

It's all about DVD sales now for Superman Returns. If they're really good, then....

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Unless it flops on DVD it's getting a sequel. I don't even know why we are arguing about rather the movie will get a sequel or not? It's obvious that that a sequel will be made, now rather all of the cast and crew is comming back, thats a debate.

 

[romeogbs19]

Unless it flops on DVD it's getting a sequel. I don't even know why we are arguing about rather the movie will get a sequel or not? It's obvious that that a sequel will be made, now rather all of the cast and crew is comming back, thats a debate.

Exactly -- SR is getting a sequel. This is pretty much guaranteed. Why we're still talking about this is prob. because we don't have anything more fruitful to speak to.

 

[Binker]

The movie wasn't the problem, it was the other things. Jeez, they don't even say how much fans loved it, the reviews were mostly positive, many want Singer and co on the sequel, and that the g**-d*** Pirates sequel was released one week later and stole everything.

Maybe if the film was released EARLIER, there wouldn't this much crap.

That, too much money, little marketing ARE THE REASONS WHY THE FILM TURNED OUT THE WAY IT DID. Again, this is just like X-Men and X2. What happened to X-Men's second week; it went down to 2nd rank. Same goes to this.

I hate hearing this BS, from those people, even from people who hated the film FOR NO REASON.

 

[Dr. Fate]

Flops dont get sequels.


SR is getting a sequel.


Justify that.

Because the studio is run by morons.

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

Flops dont get sequels.


SR is getting a sequel.


Justify that.

I made that same post about the Hulk, 3 years ago after the same studio "fluff" was put out by Universal. "We expected better, critics liked it, it will be profitable regardless, etc. etc etc. Nothing's guaranteed until WB gives a greenlight to the project.
Seeing as how WB's entire summer movie slate ****-canned, theyre gonna be thinking long and hard before greenlighting any big budget movies, especially ones with a less than stellar track record.

.

 

[Carp Man]

Flops dont get sequels.


SR is getting a sequel.


Justify that.

Sequel is not a guarantee untill it is officialy anounced, and just the fact that there has been no official anouncement, I say they give the franchise over to Sony. At least they know how to market a superhero movie into a blockbuster. They know how to market, and what the target audience is. SR marketing was all over the map. The look of the Superman costume did not help any at the boxoffice. Huge mistake.

 

[Binker]

MSN Movies ranked Hulk as the fifth worst superhero movie to date, behind Batman and Robin, Daredevil, Catwoman and Fantastic Four.

Ebert & Roeper gave it Two Thumbs Up (see, I don't know their rating count, that much, after that).

Other critics like David Ansen of Newsweek, Peter Travers of Rolling Stone, James Berardinelli and Jeffrey Lyons of WNBC-TV also gave the film positive reviews. It holds 60% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.

Now that makes me SICK!

 

[AgentPat]

Who is horn and robinov...

July, '04:
http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127178

Given the events of the last two years, that thread is HYSTERICAL!

Note the user names.

 

[Showtime]

That is PS, Pre-Showtime.

 

[Thespiralgoeson]

Ebert & Roeper gave it Two Thumbs Up (see, I don't know their rating count, that much, after that).

Uh, might wanna check your facts there. Roger Ebert hated the movie.

EDIT: NM, I didn't realize you were talking about Hulk.

 

[Michael Corleone]

Well the thing is SR wasn't a flop. It certainly did not perform the way they thought. However, the film was not a flop. It suffered from a bloated budget that it was destined to not regain domestically. The big problem here is going to be Warner Brothers. I seriously hope they look at more than just the DVD sales, because the DVD of Returns isn't going to be huge either. Why? Well look at what they have coming out. They have overcompensated big time. How many fans are going to go out and get the Returns DVD and how many are going to instead go get the Ultimate Collection(which contains Returns)? I think you are going to see lower sales because of this for just the returns. Hell, Parents are gonna want to get the Reeve films too. If that's the case Returns could see poor sales by itself. They've cast too large of a net and it may be hurtful to a sequel. That in my opinion is bad business.

Now if they are aware of this, which I doubt, and they look at the sales for the ultimate collection too and all subsequent releases of Returns? Well then I think a sequel is a safe bet. But, I'm skeptical as to if the "suits" even have a clue as to what they are doing.

 

[Pickle-El]

Couldn't they just as easily inflate the DVD numbers by including the ultimate collection as well? How would we know?

 

[Binker]

The Ultimate Collection may be seen as the big buy for many, but it's not technically. The big buys of Superman DVDs is Superman Returns Deluxe Edition and Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut. I can't pick by which but those two are the first two ranked DVDs to get by us.

The Ultimate Collector's Edition is a set that is 100 bucks and will only be bought by people who can afford it. Personally, I won't get because I don't care about SIII and SIV. The only thing that's making think of getting the first two films (even though I already have the SE STM back from 2001) are the '40s cartoons.

The way I see it: WB is (or should) looking at the Superman Returns DVDs, seperate or included in a set, as a whole. Because either if you buy it as just the DVD or within a set, the fact remains: the DVD was bought.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well the thing is SR wasn't a flop. It certainly did not perform the way they thought. However, the film was not a flop. It suffered from a bloated budget that it was destined to not regain domestically. The big problem here is going to be Warner Brothers. I seriously hope they look at more than just the DVD sales, because the DVD of Returns isn't going to be huge either. Why? Well look at what they have coming out. They have overcompensated big time. How many fans are going to go out and get the Returns DVD and how many are going to instead go get the Ultimate Collection(which contains Returns)? I think you are going to see lower sales because of this for just the returns. Hell, Parents are gonna want to get the Reeve films too. If that's the case Returns could see poor sales by itself. They've cast too large of a net and it may be hurtful to a sequel. That in my opinion is bad business.

Now if they are aware of this, which I doubt, and they look at the sales for the ultimate collection too and all subsequent releases of Returns? Well then I think a sequel is a safe bet. But, I'm skeptical as to if the "suits" even have a clue as to what they are doing.

True, but i think a lot of people will be buying the ultimate collection anyway, so as some one else, that will still be a sale of an SR DVD. But i think SR will do well in its own right anyway. It might not make huge numbers, but if it makes close to $100 million on DVD, that will go some way to greenlighting a sequel.

 

[buggs0268]

The movie wasn't the problem, it was the other things. Jeez, they don't even say how much fans loved it, the reviews were mostly positive, many want Singer and co on the sequel, and that the g**-d*** Pirates sequel was released one week later and stole everything.

Maybe if the film was released EARLIER, there wouldn't this much crap.

That, too much money, little marketing ARE THE REASONS WHY THE FILM TURNED OUT THE WAY IT DID. Again, this is just like X-Men and X2. What happened to X-Men's second week; it went down to 2nd rank. Same goes to this.

I hate hearing this BS, from those people, even from people who hated the film FOR NO REASON.

The film stunk and was a chick flick (singers words0 and that is why it failed. No one wanted to go and see a Superman movie that turned out to be a chick flick. Luthor's plan was lame. Plot holes a plenty. And it was a rehash of ground covered in STM 200 times better. Even Singer stated he was taking him down the same journey. So, in short..the film was the problem as it did not connect with the GA, there was bad WOM, and the box office suffered. And I am sick of hearing how great it was BS when it wasn't. And this is just one of a few articles where Horn confirms it is a flop without comming out and saying so. It was the tentpole film that fell away.

 

[romeogbs19]

oh lord, let's please not have that chick-flick argument again ...

Let's keep to talking about the film and not labeling it. That whole 'chick flick' comment is SO blown out of proportion. Singer meant it in contrast to X-men. And really, it's not a chick-flick -- if you thought there was emotional turmoil in SR, you're smoking something.

 

[Freddy_Krueger]

there was bad WOM, and the box office suffered. And I am sick of hearing how great it was BS when it wasn't.

Such bad word of mouth that it dropped very little for three weeks straight and earned over a million dollars Labor Day weekend and has only dropped little by little since.

Yeah, everyone sure does hate this movie.

And you're sick of hearing how great it was? Deal with it. It's called opinion: there is no right or wrong.

 

[romeogbs19]

Such bad word of mouth that it dropped very little for three weeks straight and earned over a million dollars Labor Day weekend and has only dropped little by little since.

Yeah, everyone sure does hate this movie.

And you're sick of hearing how great it was? Deal with it. It's called opinion: there is no right or wrong.

Exactly. The movie might have disappointed lofty WB execs, and industry pundits who think the world of Supe's marketing appeal, but SR is FAR from a failure. Whether it's good or not is your opinion, but near $200M justifies it's a good flick for many people.

For the record, I didn't like it that much -- but that doesn't mean I can't understand why critics/others liked it.