Superman Returns SR Sequel: $200 million or else!?

Freddy_Krueger said:
Well...it's gonna be at about $197,000,000 tomorrow...or today rather. You honestly don't think that the film can gain a meager $3 million? Hell, the film averaged $3,000 per theater last weekend. The film is only in 280 theaters and people are still driving out to see it.

The film is ACTUALLY showing legs. Now if it drops down to 100,000 this weekend, then I'll concede. But if it makes 600-700,000 then I'd say it's a pretty good chance for it to make it to $200 million.

It's showing legs to make 200 million....?????

:ghost: Typing that makes me upset.

Singer...EAT MY BOOT.

Anyway, you keep betting it will make 200 million. I hope it does at least make 200 million:super:


edit.....

JEN....you've been keeping up the fight.

Robo....Dead or alive...
 
charl_huntress said:
It's showing legs to make 200 million....?????

Well yeah. It had a slow start and went on to make as much as it has the past 71 days. Is it as much as anyone had hoped for? Well no. The lot of us were hoping for $300 million. But $200 million is nice as well.

And to close, consistent box office is a sign of good legs, yes.
 
^I think it will end up finishing JUST under $200 million domestic, with around $385 worldwide, which is a shame as the movie deserved to make more IMO.
 
I'm sure this has been said (7 pages is a lot to read of back and forths, so just read first 3, and this page), but IMO even if it's still going a bit it's not a success. Even 'if' it reaches 200 mil, that's still less than Batman, X-Men, and Spiderman, which in a non-comic book fans eyes it could look like the characters losing steam. To a number cruncher who looks at $$ and nothing else, domestically it was almost a disaster to what many thought it would take in. To the average public, who may not read comics, heard mixed to bad reviews via word of mouth, and don't look up SR on the net and get the word 'disapointment' or 'sucks' in atleast 6 outta 10 pages, then their going to be less inclined to see the next. My personal feelings aside on feeling it was a decent, but barely above avg film, I do feel it hurt Superman films in the future. The next Superman film won't get near the budget this one got, it has less enthusiasm if it comes out sooner than later and this is in ppl's minds, so it possibly won't even be as successful as this. Not to count (can't remember the name), but some DC guy like 10 yrs ago said he was talking to a WB employee and the WB employee asked him where he worked, he said in the comic book branch, and the WB guy said he was surprised to here they still had a comics book division. That gives you the mindset of how WB views their comics division, and how lower numbers might leave a nastier taste in their mouth about it.

What's more it's like others have said, over the corse of like 10 yrs they've been trying to get Superman into a new flick, and spent nearly $40-60 million trying (few contracts fell thru and stars were paid anyway). Now they put in close to $250 million, possibly more into the films budget and advertising. So altogether trying to get this film up and now going they've spent $300+ million. Now domestically it's made roughly $196m, and that's to the populace that sees him as an icon and almost everyone knows his name. Then there's the toys you see everywhere they can't seem to sell and however much they put into that (not sure if they pay a manufacturer or what). Not to count if a movie makes let's say $200m in BO, others take a chunk out of that $200m, pretty sure the theater it runs in takes a chunk, among others. Plus DVD's haven't even come out yet, so not sure if they'll help or hurt, there is always the possibility that ppl who didn't shell out $5-10 for a ticket won't shell out $20+ for a DVD.

I like Superman as a character, tho he feels a bit stale to me, but I think this movie overall has hurt the franchise. Even if they make any money back, the future installments will never get as much cash as this, meaning less special effects and overall quality. Not to count when I was a kid and my mom got a Superman tape and I watched it, I loved it, and it set me up to want to watch this movie. I have a feeling this movie went right over this generations kids, I saw a lot of them asleep, crying, or with a bored to tears look in their eyes when I left. My sis's friend kid who loved the Hulk of all things, said he had never been so bored in his life. So from possibly losing money, to possibly hurting sequals and their budgets, to possibly hurting Superman or atleast his films in the eyes of future generations, I think this movie has been a failure. I may be a Marvel fan, but I wanted this movie to succeed because it was a comic movie, so I'm not just trying to trash talk on it.
 
FadingCB said:
I'm sure this has been said (7 pages is a lot to read of back and forths, so just read first 3, and this page), but IMO even if it's still going a bit it's not a success. Even 'if' it reaches 200 mil, that's still less than Batman, X-Men, and Spiderman, which in a non-comic book fans eyes it could look like the characters losing steam. To a number cruncher who looks at $$ and nothing else, domestically it was almost a disaster to what many thought it would take in. To the average public, who may not read comics, heard mixed to bad reviews via word of mouth, and don't look up SR on the net and get the word 'disapointment' or 'sucks' in atleast 6 outta 10 pages, then their going to be less inclined to see the next. My personal feelings aside on feeling it was a decent, but barely above avg film, I do feel it hurt Superman films in the future. The next Superman film won't get near the budget this one got, it has less enthusiasm if it comes out sooner than later and this is in ppl's minds, so it possibly won't even be as successful as this. Not to count (can't remember the name), but some DC guy like 10 yrs ago said he was talking to a WB employee and the WB employee asked him where he worked, he said in the comic book branch, and the WB guy said he was surprised to here they still had a comics book division. That gives you the mindset of how WB views their comics division, and how lower numbers might leave a nastier taste in their mouth about it.

What's more it's like others have said, over the corse of like 10 yrs they've been trying to get Superman into a new flick, and spent nearly $40-60 million trying (few contracts fell thru and stars were paid anyway). Now they put in close to $250 million, possibly more into the films budget and advertising. So altogether trying to get this film up and now going they've spent $300+ million. Now domestically it's made roughly $196m, and that's to the populace that sees him as an icon and almost everyone knows his name. Then there's the toys you see everywhere they can't seem to sell and however much they put into that (not sure if they pay a manufacturer or what). Not to count if a movie makes let's say $200m in BO, others take a chunk out of that $200m, pretty sure the theater it runs in takes a chunk, among others. Plus DVD's haven't even come out yet, so not sure if they'll help or hurt, there is always the possibility that ppl who didn't shell out $5-10 for a ticket won't shell out $20+ for a DVD.

I like Superman as a character, tho he feels a bit stale to me, but I think this movie overall has hurt the franchise. Even if they make any money back, the future installments will never get as much cash as this, meaning less special effects and overall quality. Not to count when I was a kid and my mom got a Superman tape and I watched it, I loved it, and it set me up to want to watch this movie. I have a feeling this movie went right over this generations kids, I saw a lot of them asleep, crying, or with a bored to tears look in their eyes when I left. My sis's friend kid who loved the Hulk of all things, said he had never been so bored in his life. So from possibly losing money, to possibly hurting sequals and their budgets, to possibly hurting Superman or atleast his films in the eyes of future generations, I think this movie has been a failure. I may be a Marvel fan, but I wanted this movie to succeed because it was a comic movie, so I'm not just trying to trash talk on it.

I see your points, i am more of a Marvel fan myself, but i loved this movie, and feel that it deserved to make more, this is the first Superman movie that has ever got me interested in reading the comics, and i feel the sequel will be one of the best CB movies ever.

Another reason i was dissapointed this movie failed is the run-time, more comic book movies should be the length of SR IMO, but the performance of SR may put off studio's from giving CB movies that length in the future.
 
AVEITWITHJAMON said:
I see your points, i am more of a Marvel fan myself, but i loved this movie, and feel that it deserved to make more, this is the first Superman movie that has ever got me interested in reading the comics, and i feel the sequel will be one of the best CB movies ever.

Another reason i was dissapointed this movie failed is the run-time, more comic book movies should be the length of SR IMO, but the performance of SR may put off studio's from giving CB movies that length in the future.

I hope not. I agree with you about comic movies being longer. Dont' really agree about the sequel to Superman being the best CB movie ever. I'm just hnot confident that Singer alone has the expertise to pull that off. Maybe if he actually started reading some comic books, and added some comic writers and got off of this "singerman" kick...he can do it. but until he starts making films for the general audience and superman fans alike..he will fail. He can't keep doing whatever he wants and putting out what he wants...

I do think that SR will cripple the Superman franchise unless the sequel can redeem it...time will tell.

But spiderman 3 still gives me hope...and a host of other comicbook movies will be coming out. it is a shame that SR didn't perform like expected..because compared to other comicbook heroes..superman is supposed to be the cream of the crop.
 
ThanosOfTitans said:
I hope not. I agree with you about comic movies being longer. Dont' really agree about the sequel to Superman being the best CB movie ever. I'm just hnot confident that Singer alone has the expertise to pull that off. Maybe if he actually started reading some comic books, and added some comic writers and got off of this "singerman" kick...he can do it. but until he starts making films for the general audience and superman fans alike..he will fail. He can't keep doing whatever he wants and putting out what he wants...

I do think that SR will cripple the Superman franchise unless the sequel can redeem it...time will tell.

But spiderman 3 still gives me hope...and a host of other comicbook movies will be coming out. it is a shame that SR didn't perform like expected..because compared to other comicbook heroes..superman is supposed to be the cream of the crop.

Well i think the sequel will turn out to be ONE of the best CB movies, not THE best, i mean look how X2 turned out.
 
I think another thing that hurt it onto whats already been said is oversaturation of Superhero movies. Aside from the Marvel and DC movies, there's been the Incredibles, a Tim Allen one, My super ex-girlfriend, and 2 or three others in the last few years. IMO only Marvel and DC should be making superhero movies as they have plenty to make and stories to tell, and too many of a certain genre can make the crowd go sour on it. Not saying I didn't like Increcibles (surprised, but I actual thought it was decent), but just saying that it seems Hollywood sees Hero flicks doing well so decide to do like 30 at once. Hopefully it won't turn anyone off tho, Marvel has a list a mile long their wanting to do, also if I read right Marvel will start producing their own movies, and the first is a redo of the Hulk movie closer to the comics with a new director. Personally I wouldn't mind comic companies doing their own movies, they may not be experts on pleasing everyone, but if a writer of a series redoes his own stories on the big screen, it might be a lot more faithful and pleasing to the comic fans.

Sry for the slight derailment lol.
 
^Marvel 1st movie produced by themselves will be Iron Man, with Hulk 2 coming out later the same year. But if it was only Marvel and DC making movies, we wouldnt have got Hellboy and Sin City, both of which are excellent movies.
 
AVEITWITHJAMON said:
^Marvel 1st movie produced by themselves will be Iron Man, with Hulk 2 coming out later the same year. But if it was only Marvel and DC making movies, we wouldnt have got Hellboy and Sin City, both of which are excellent movies.
I'm all for ANY good superhero movies or comic adaptions. I'm still waiting for good movie versions of a bunch of comic and non-comic properties. Thundercats, SilverHawks, He-Man, Voltron. As for comic movies I want to see, I'd have to break out my DC Encyclopedia to start. Next, I'd have to visit the Marvel directory to remember all the titles I want to see get a film...
 
Just a question, but I noticed that Showbiz data and BOM have different numbers for Superman Returns so far. Showbiz data says that has made just over 197mil and BOM says that its made just under that mark. Which ones right? :confused:
 
AVEITWITHJAMON said:
^Marvel 1st movie produced by themselves will be Iron Man, with Hulk 2 coming out later the same year. But if it was only Marvel and DC making movies, we wouldnt have got Hellboy and Sin City, both of which are excellent movies.

Oops, heh forgot about that. Guess I meant more along the lines of actual comic book superhero making movies, and less thought up on the spot because superhero's are the in thing movies. Not that there aren't decent ones, but Hollywood has a habit of running a trend, or genre into the ground very easily. I'd rather Comic movies come out every year or two, rather than 3 a year, oversaturation of this genre can sour the public on it and hurt the ones like X-Men or Superman because ppl will think, "Well I just saw a superhero movie last week...I'll wait til it's on DVD".
 
SR also in my opinion was undermarketed. Maybe it's just me.
 
^Well thats more like a fact, even many people who disliked the movie will admit that the marketing was poor for SR. I think WB thought that the Superman name would be enough to draw in the crowds, but they were wrong.
 
The international run is nearly spent, with all major markets no opened...$400 million is probably not in reach, so unquestionably, the movie's over all cost will impact the profit margin for the Legendary.WB deal, but both parties seem to be onboard for a sequel.
 
at the end of the day, it's serious serious disappointment at the Box Office

good to know that the entirity of the Superman Franchise lies in this man's hands:

singer-bryan.jpg
 
"I'm too sexy for my shirt"

That's what instantly popped up in my head
 
MJB said:
SR also in my opinion was undermarketed. Maybe it's just me.

pfft. Many movies probably wish they had as much pre-hype and exposure as SR. did they not put posters and stuff all over town and do the blog thing like most big movies do nowadays? plust comic con, plus all the stuff that's not really marketing, but licensing as Greencapt pointed out. I don't know. Maybe it wasn't the best, but I wouldn't say it was too bad.
 
Seeing How Superman movie franchise has been absent from the movies since July 24, 1987 - SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE . I think SUPERMAN RETURNS getting a grand Domestic Total $196,977,353 , Worldwide: $377,977,353 is pretty good. I can't wait for the sequel, I believe it will make more money .
 
charl_huntress said:
It's showing legs to make 200 million....?????

:ghost: Typing that makes me upset.

Singer...EAT MY BOOT.

Anyway, you keep betting it will make 200 million. I hope it does at least make 200 million:super:


edit.....

JEN....you've been keeping up the fight.

Robo....Dead or alive...


"Legs" doesn't refer to the ultimate Box Office take, just how long something is still playing in theaters. Devil Wears Prada had excellent legs, but it won't end up with anywhere near $200 mil. SR is still in the top 20 over two months since it came out...sure, this is nothing compared to Pirates, but considering some high profile flicks that have come out after SR ( Miami Vice, Lady in the Water,Monster House, Ant Bully, Super Ex, You, Me and Dupree, etc ) are now totally out of the top 20, I would say SR has shown decent, if not spectacular legs.
 
echostation said:
at the end of the day, it's serious serious disappointment at the Box Office

good to know that the entirity of the Superman Franchise lies in this man's hands:

singer-bryan.jpg


It looks like some silly pic taken for a photo spread in Movieline or Premiere. Lots of celebs do that. Big deal. Didn't you post a pic of Singer and the SR writers once where they looked really gay and say something like "Do you want this man to handle your Icon??" If you don't want Bryan Singer to direct Superman because he's gay, just F***ing admit it. Don't be coy about it...own your bigotry. Wear it proudly. Lord knows you won't be the only one around here who does.
 
Legs? No, not quite, it's hasnt been enough normal theaters for the past 3 weekends to even argue that.

SR has been surviving the last few weeks based on IMAX and IMAX alone.
 
The Incredible Hulk said:
Legs? No, not quite, it's hasnt been enough normal theaters for the past 3 weekends to even argue that.

SR has been surviving the last few weeks based on IMAX and IMAX alone.

True, but IMAX is still a theatrical presentation, and people are still going to see it there. We could argue back and forth whether or not that's "cheating", but just because it's IMAX doesn't mean it should not count. In my opinion.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"