Iron Man 2 SHIELD/Avengers complaints...

[dark_b]

Yeah, you're right, the general public would never want to see a movie that has multiple characters they like to see in it. That would never work. It's crazy! It's insane! Ludicrous! Who would ever think of such a thing?

By the way, does anybody want to see The Expendables?

where did i writte that the GA will not watch a movie with characters that they like?

wtf?

 

[jmc]

I can see everyone's point. I'm a little on the fence about all this. If Thor and Cap underperform like TIH, what will that mean to The Avengers? Will alot of people still see it? Yeah I think they could actually. Or they may not. If they have no interest in those other characters that mean they will want to see The Avengers? Or is it because everyone is teaming up and the action is immense in the trailers? There's still the fact they don't care about those characters and won't care about them teaming up. It's still all the same.

If Marvel plays their cards right, it could all work fine.

TIH underperformed... well... people still will want to see Hulk and IM, RDJ and Norton on the screen together. There's that.

So I'm going towards the fact that they still will want to see it. It's pretty murky at this point. We won't really know until next year. But you can sure as bet my ass will be in that seat.

I was under the impression Norton wasn't a definite starter for Avengers.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

cute.

should i bring up how every fan said that watchmen would make money and how Kick Ass was going to be very popular with the GA?

Oh yeah. Good point dark! Wathcmen and Kick-ass totally had characters that were around for 40+ years with several movies, tv shows, and long running comic series. They were totally popular to more people than comic book fans and it still bombed. Oh the disaster!

Get over yourself dark. Watchmen and Kick-ass didn't bomb but they did tank. Big difference Both films made back their budget and watchmen has proven to be very popular on DVD. Plus they were both rated R. Avengers definitely won't be rated R. Its been proven that superhero films rated R aren't won't sell as many tickets. With those two films and Punisher War Zone.

you mean fans right?

A lot of people will be into the Avengers because Iron Man is popular character and so is Captain America. Don't act like no one's heard of Captain America. If you show a random person the shield people will tell you its Captain America. I expect Thor to be a very good film that will have an Iron Man-like effect on him. Hulk was still successful with DVD sales. Stop underestimating the GA. I'm not say that The Avengers will break a billion, but it can gross $700-800 million at least. Transformers did.

 

[Figs]

Hulk was still successful with DVD sales. Stop underestimating the GA. I'm not say that The Avengers will break a billion, but it can gross $700-800 million at least. Transformers did.

By the way, how much did TIH make with DVD sales? I always wondered if people were interested but didn't want to go to the theatre after being somewhat burned by Ang Lee's version. I'm talking about the GA of course.

 

[kedrell]

I think it did about the same on DVD as Superman Returns but SR made nearly twice as much $ in theaters. So either TIH did better than expected on DVD or SR did worse or both happened.

Also, SR cost $100M more to make than TIH.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

By the way, how much did TIH make with DVD sales? I always wondered if people were interested but didn't want to go to the theatre after being somewhat burned by Ang Lee's version. I'm talking about the GA of course.

That was the reason too why TIH underperformed. Many people thought TIH was a sequel to Hulk and the ones that knew it wasn't but didn't see it were turned off from it after Hulk.

TIH made $85,755,879 in DVD sales and was the #1 selling dvd when it was released. Hulk in comparison only made $61.2 million. Superman Returns made around $81,574,770 in dvd sales. Iron Man in comparison made a whopping $160 million in DVD sales.

TIH did fine for what was a smaller marketing, but the funny thing is that it did have a bigger budget than Iron Man. But what I heard from Box Office analysts, The Incredible Hulk actually overperformed at the box office.

EDIT: The budget for Iron Man however didn't take in account for marketing campaign which cost $50-75 million.

 

[Son of Coul]

cute.

should i bring up how every fan said that watchmen would make money and how Kick Ass was going to be very popular with the GA?

Pretty much this:

Oh yeah. Good point dark! Wathcmen and Kick-ass totally had characters that were around for 40+ years with several movies, tv shows, and long running comic series. They were totally popular to more people than comic book fans and it still bombed. Oh the disaster!

Get over yourself dark. Watchmen and Kick-ass didn't bomb but they did tank. Big difference Both films made back their budget and watchmen has proven to be very popular on DVD. Plus they were both rated R. Avengers definitely won't be rated R. Its been proven that superhero films rated R aren't won't sell as many tickets. With those two films and Punisher War Zone.

Like Parker said, two R-rated movies based on obscure graphic novels =/= A PG-13 summer blockbuster targeting all ages featuring very popular comic book heroes already established in separate franchises, at least one of which hugely popular.

cute though.

 

[Figs]

That was the reason too why TIH underperformed. Many people thought TIH was a sequel to Hulk and the ones that knew it wasn't but didn't see it were turned off from it after Hulk.

TIH made $85,755,879 in DVD sales and was the #1 selling dvd when it was released. Hulk in comparison only made $61.2 million. Superman Returns made around $81,574,770 in dvd sales. Iron Man in comparison made a whopping $160 million in DVD sales.

TIH did fine for what was a smaller marketing, but the funny thing is that it did have a bigger budget than Iron Man. But what I heard from Box Office analysts, The Incredible Hulk actually overperformed at the box office.

By those numbers it's quite possible as I said in my previous post, that a lot of people skipped making the trek to the theatre to wait for the DVD instead. Which by those sales show that people were still interested in the big green guy and were just probably a little on the fence after Ang's film. For the most part I think it's safe to say that Hulk along with IM are two selling points for the Avengers film. Now we just have to cross our fingers and hope Thor and Cap will be well liked.

I was telling my gf when we were waiting for IM2 to start on Imax that Thor is going to be different than just about every comic film we've had to date, due to the whole fantasy element. I can't wait to see some more pics of actual sets and not just the characters, I really want to see what Branagh has done with this film visually.

 

[danoyse]

The general public will be absolutely fine with an Avengers film - as long as the standalone movies stay good and the actual Avengers film is just as good as the standalone films.

Look at Iron Man - he was considered a second-tier character two years ago. Not anymore. TIH might not have been as much of a hit, but the audience I saw it with went crazy when RDJ showed up in the last scene. When I saw Wolverine last summer, one of the people who waited for the end credits scene shouted "HEY! WHERE'S ROBERT DOWNEY JR!" He was like geniunely disappointed he wasn't part of that scene (of course we saw the Japan ending and I heard him complaining "What happens in China???" when we were leaving, but whatever)

They make Thor and Captain America even half as good as Iron Man, with the promise that all of these characters will be teaming up in another movie...that's gonna be a big hit with everyone.

 

[Figs]

Not only can I not wait to see the Thor and Captain America films but I also can't wait to see what tie-ins they use for those films.

 

[danoyse]

My dad's jaw dropped when he saw the Thor ending at the end of IM2. He didn't know they were making that into a movie.

When Tony picked up Cap's shield, he said to me "Is that what I think it is?" He wasn't sure if that was really supposed to be his shield.

He was loving it.

 

[LightningFlash]

^^ Haha, my dad thinks Batman is in the Avengers(for some reason he thought The Dark Knight was related to when Iron Man and TIH came out).

I obviously had to teach him the difference between DC and Marvel, lol.

And regarding The Incredible Hulk, I believe it would've garnered more hype/sales/whatever if they had the entire story(that other 35 minutes of footage) that entailed the entire story that Edward Norton added unto it. That way, the film would've felt a lot more even with action and story, as a lot of fans, even comic-book fans, want a film with that balance to it and I believe there aren't as many fans of TIH because of that unbalance feel. And, for some reason, Universal said "no" and deleted scenes, which is sad. And I think it was Universal.

It would be very disappointing if it was Marvel that forced them to edit the film and take out those scenes.

 

[dark_b]

it doesnt matter if Kick ass and Watchmen were R rated movies. fact is that the fans of those movies or books thought that the general public will like it....................because they liked the material.

fans a lot of times can not look at the situation wihtout their fanboy mentality.


and i am not saying that Avengers will not be popular or that it will be a bomb. i am just trying to explain that a lot of you here think that it will be popular because you want it to be popular because you like the concept.

 

[dark_b]

They make Thor and Captain America even half as good as Iron Man, with the promise that all of these characters will be teaming up in another movie...that's gonna be a big hit with everyone.

if IM is a 10/10 then half good would mean a 5/10. i didnt know that 5/10 is a good rating for SHH standards or anyone on this planet.

danoyse i know that you didnt mean 5/10. just kidding.


back on topic. look how things change fast. TIH was supposed to be a hit. but it wasnt. for 2008 the BO was not big enough to be called a hit. look at IM2 numbers. i think deep inside 95% of use expected IM2 to come close to TDK opening numbers. but it didnt.IM2 will of course make a big profit.

Thor and CA could be a hit..........or they could underperform. and underperform means that there is not interest in the character.

 

[dark_b]

I think it did about the same on DVD as Superman Returns but SR made nearly twice as much $ in theaters. So either TIH did better than expected on DVD or SR did worse or both happened.

Also, SR cost $100M more to make than TIH.

Boxoffice mojo?

you think SR cost 270 millions? its a known fact that BOmojo has all the money together from MCG,JJ,BUrton,.....
and TIH cost more then 150 millions. 150 is a cliche number that almost every studio realeses. TIH cost more then 150


SR of course has nothign to do with TIH. but i guess you need to compare TIH numbers to some other underperformer? t:

 

[kedrell]

There is no evidence that TIH cost more than $150M. And even if it did, it couldn't have cost more than $165M since that was the cap per film agreed on in the Merril Lynch loan to Marvel. But I'll sick with $150M since that was the story from the get-go and it never changed unlike oh, say XO:W which initially was reported to be the highest budgeted X-film and then after the leak they quickly changed their story and said it cost much less. I don't know that SR cost $270M for sure either. Wikipedia for example lists the budget at $209M but who knows the real story. I do think it's extremely likely that ultimately it probably ended up with a smaller percentage of profit fot WB/DC than TIH did for Marvel. And why wouldn't you compare underperformers to get a better over-all picture via the contrast.

I am virtually sure that SR's marketing cost was way beyond TIH's.

 

[kedrell]

^^ Haha, my dad thinks Batman is in the Avengers(for some reason he thought The Dark Knight was related to when Iron Man and TIH came out).

I obviously had to teach him the difference between DC and Marvel, lol.

And regarding The Incredible Hulk, I believe it would've garnered more hype/sales/whatever if they had the entire story(that other 35 minutes of footage) that entailed the entire story that Edward Norton added unto it. That way, the film would've felt a lot more even with action and story, as a lot of fans, even comic-book fans, want a film with that balance to it and I believe there aren't as many fans of TIH because of that unbalance feel. And, for some reason, Universal said "no" and deleted scenes, which is sad. And I think it was Universal.

It would be very disappointing if it was Marvel that forced them to edit the film and take out those scenes.

Why wouldn't it have been Marvel? TIH was like IM1 & 2 except it was distributed by Universal rather than Paramount. Universal has no say creatively. Marvel owns the rights to Hulk ever since Universal defaulted after Anghulk by not making any more movies. Now universal may not have fought it in exchange for the distribution deal but it's not theirs any more. And I tend to think that creative descision was ultimately the work of David Maisel, they money guy who was at marvel at the time but now isn't there any more.

 

[FaT_tONle]

EDIT: The budget for Iron Man however didn't take in account for marketing campaign which cost $50-75 million.

How much does Marvel put into the marketing? There is no way Paramount covered that entire figure, otherwise it wouldn't have been profitable for them. Where is that figure from anyway?

 

[dark_b]

i wouldnt be suprised if they spend less money on IM2 marketing then IM.

the fanbase was already on board and the geenral public loved the movie ,DVD and BR. so they would buy a ticket even wit ha trailer and tv spot.

 

[roach]

i wold doubt that...every 10 seconds there is an IM2 commercial on tv

 

[Doc Samson]

if IM is a 10/10 then half good would mean a 5/10. i didnt know that 5/10 is a good rating for SHH standards or anyone on this planet.

danoyse i know that you didnt mean 5/10. just kidding.


back on topic. look how things change fast. TIH was supposed to be a hit. but it wasnt. for 2008 the BO was not big enough to be called a hit. look at IM2 numbers. i think deep inside 95% of use expected IM2 to come close to TDK opening numbers. but it didnt.IM2 will of course make a big profit.

Thor and CA could be a hit..........or they could underperform. and underperform means that there is not interest in the character.

I tend to kind of agree with what your saying here. I believe sometimes we have a tendency to look at these movies through our "fanboy" tinted glasses, but the truth is that there's a very small group of superheroes that the general masses will pay to see no matter what the marketing or trailers can drum up. Superman, Spiderman, Batman, they'll at least give those movies a look. Even Batman Begins, while not garnering nearly enough attention due to Batman & Robin upon release, caught enough of the regular public's eye to make good on dvd sales.

I think Thor has the potential to possibly be the best movie Marvel's made thus far, but I can't believe that it would automatically translate to huge box office numbers just based off of that. He's even more of an obscure character than Ironman ever was, and it could be hard to grasp for some, we don't know yet. Captain America, and how it performs outside of this country, is anyone's guess, especially in these times. On the other hand, the Hulk and now Ironman are on that second-tier of characters world renowned, and if nothing else, people should get pretty excited to see them in the same movie

 

[dark_b]

i have a feeling that for Thor you need a huge budget. over 200 millions.

but as i can see with TIH,IM and IM2 i see that Marvel doesnt want to spend a lot of money on those movies.

 

[LightningFlash]

Why wouldn't it have been Marvel? TIH was like IM1 & 2 except it was distributed by Universal rather than Paramount. Universal has no say creatively. Marvel owns the rights to Hulk ever since Universal defaulted after Anghulk by not making any more movies. Now universal may not have fought it in exchange for the distribution deal but it's not theirs any more. And I tend to think that creative descision was ultimately the work of David Maisel, they money guy who was at marvel at the time but now isn't there any more.

It just doesn't make sense that Marvel made them take out those scenes though because the Iron Man films kept most of their scenes, and with the scenes that had to be taken out, they made sense for them to be taken out due to confusion of certain character's actions(like Black Widow flirting with Tony Stark way too much than she should). TIH's deleted scenes were gold, imo. They put a lot more detail into Banner's work in Brazil.

i have a feeling that for Thor you need a huge budget. over 200 millions.

but as i can see with TIH,IM and IM2 i see that Marvel doesnt want to spend a lot of money on those movies.

Iron Man was I believe $140-$150 million.

The Incredible Hulk was $140 million.

And Iron Man 2 was, I THINK, $170 million.

Thor is supposedly only $150 million as well.

So, whatever Marvel is doing, they're trying to keep all of their movies, so far, under the 200 mark. But that will be a problem, because even though I think they can do Captain America easily at the $140 million mark, The Avengers will have to be $200 million because they are dealing with so much.

 

[Figs]

So, whatever Marvel is doing, they're trying to keep all of their movies, so far, under the 200 mark. But that will be a problem, because even though I think they can do Captain America easily at the $140 million mark, The Avengers will have to be $200 million because they are dealing with so much.

Agreed. I don't care if i'm jumping the gun or worrying for no reason but an Avengers film under the $200 mark is in fact not a good sign. For two reasons. 1. Not enough of a budget(especially after the actor's pay)for the mass amount of effects that should be in this movie. 2. If they do in fact have a lot of effects or at least a decent amount, they might not look that great. I'm not a CGI nitpicker so Hulk in TIH didn't bother me in those few shots were it was real noticeable but I hope they can improve on him in The Avengers.

Thor is also going to need a pretty damn big budget for the effects I think.

 

[kedrell]

It just doesn't make sense that Marvel made them take out those scenes though because the Iron Man films kept most of their scenes, and with the scenes that had to be taken out, they made sense for them to be taken out due to confusion of certain character's actions(like Black Widow flirting with Tony Stark way too much than she should). TIH's deleted scenes were gold, imo. They put a lot more detail into Banner's work in Brazil.

I said it was very likely David Maisel who was the president at the time(and the money guy, Fiege's the creative guy) who ultimately had the call on that. He's also the one who nixed the Mandarin from the 1st Iron Man movie and they beefed up Stane to be the main villain instead. Now in that instance it worked out anyway, but Favs from the start had said he wanted to use the Mandarin as the main bad guy in IM1. Plus, there was more trepidation with the Hulk movie after what happened to the first film. Marvel HAD to release 2 films in 2008 due to the Merril Lynch contract, otherwise they would have been better off saving TIH for summer of 2009.

Iron Man was I believe $140-$150 million.

The Incredible Hulk was $140 million.

Everything I've seen says TIH cost $150M. Now IM probably cost more ultimately since you also have to factor in marketing costs and they spent more marketing IM than TIH for sure.

And Iron Man 2 was, I THINK, $170 million.

Thor is supposedly only $150 million as well.

So, whatever Marvel is doing, they're trying to keep all of their movies, so far, under the 200 mark. But that will be a problem, because even though I think they can do Captain America easily at the $140 million mark, The Avengers will have to be $200 million because they are dealing with so much.

I'm not sure if Marvel is still constrained to the $165M production budget cap per film from the ML deal or not(probably not though since the Disney acquisition). But either way, they don't want to waste money or spend it unwisely.