Superman Returns "Superman Returns" performed to expectations

[Dark_Lord]

Warner strong finish

Until fall, when Warner Bros. scored big with "Happy Feet" ($160.5 million) and "The Departed" ($119.8 million), the venerable studio was looking to have a dismal year with the twin failures of summer releases "Poseidon" ($60 million) and "Lady in the Water" ($42.3 million).

"They had a good ending, but the spring and summer were awful, just a disaster," Vogel said. "I've been following this business for a long time and I still don't understand how someone ended up making `Poseidon' because the management there is very astute and experienced."

But "Superman Returns" performed to expectations and reinvigorated what had been a dormant franchise. With Brandon Routh now in the title role, the movie grossed $200 million domestically, and a sequel is planned.

source: http://www.dailynews.com/ci_4910729 (found by Ita-KalEl at The Planet forums)

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

Well, considering all the money sucking drama that had been going on before Singer was ever involved with the Superman franchise, it's a miracle Superman Returns earned back its budget. I think without all the aborted attempts to bastardize the character for the past 20 years prior that added to the back budget for Superman Returns, the Singer project would have been even more successful.

 

[GreenKToo]

He will have tremendous pressure on him for the sequel to perform....all the past stuff will be out of the way. If it doesnt perform,well, it will be all on him.

Well, considering all the money sucking drama that had been going on before Singer was ever involved with the Superman franchise, it's a miracle Superman Returns earned back its budget. I think without all the aborted attempts to bastardize the character for the past 20 years prior that added to the back budget for Superman Returns, the Singer project would have been even more successful.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

How can SR have performed to expectations when Alan Horn, Pres. and COO of WB Entertainment Inc., has said himself that SR should have made at least $100 mil more at the box office?

Alan Horn: "I thought it was a very successful movie, but I think it should have done $500 million worldwide," Horn said. "We should have had perhaps a little more action to satisfy the young male crowd."

link: http://comics2film.com/ProjectFrame.php?f_id=52&f_page=13

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Are we still pretending that this movie performed at or above expectations?

 

[Pickle-El]

SR rocked my socks.

 

[gimmen64]

Superman could have done better at the BO, its fanboys that didn't see SR a sucess. SR was what it was and that's a better start than anyone else has done before. I'll wait for the sequel until I pass total judgement on Superman. t:

 

[Ita-KalEl]

It performed below the expectations, but it did better than Batman Begins. This is a fact. The article says that SR met the studio's expectations reguarding the relaunch of a dead franchise.

The people consider it a diappointment because they expected the spiderman numbers. IMO it's is unfair, expecially after the not extraordinary box office numbers of Batman Begins. It's difficult to relaunch a dead franchise expecially after 20 years. You will see it when someone wil try to relaunch spiderman in the future.

The WB care that the franchise is again alive. I agree that Singer can't fail with the sequel.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It performed below the expectations, but it did better than Batman Begins. This is a fact. The article says that SR met the studio's expectations reguarding the relaunch of a dead franchise.

The people consider it a diappointment because they expected the spiderman numbers. IMO it's is unfair, expecially after the not extraordinary box office numbers of Batman Begins. It's difficult to relaunch a dead franchise expecially after 20 years. You will see it when someone wil try to relaunch spiderman in the future.

The WB care that the franchise is again alive. I agree that Singer can't fail with the sequel.

Forget Spidey numbers, how about making it's budget back in it's home country? 250mil is not an unreasonable expectation.

 

[El Payaso]

250 millions? pft, that's what I spend on my lunch.

 

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

Wait.

It actually made its money back during its theater run?????

Really?

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

Wait.

It actually made its money back during its theater run?????

It probably made its money back before hitting theatres.

 

[Diamondhead]

I don't know exactly how this work, but a movie that has been released in over 3000 theaters should make tons f money
And therefore ensure its success compare to a movie which has been release in barely one hundreds theaters

Last king of Scotland for example!
How can a movie like that make tons of money if release in only just a few theater?

It’s not about how good is a movie but mostly how many seats you get
And SR should have made over 300 millions domestic.

 

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

It probably made its money back before hitting theatres.

Seriously doubt that.

 

[bsquad]

Box Office numbers can be a mysterious beast.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

Last king of Scotland for example!
How can a movie like that make tons of money if release in only just a few theater?

It doesn't make tons of money, usually. It's rare a cheap movie will have the number of screens to get tons of money, unless it wins a lot of awards, word of mouth is strong and the average for screen grows so muche that theatre owners ask for that movie.
But rarely today with money coming from worlwide boxoffice, DVD sales and rentals and those coming from the TV right sales, a movie will end up in red.

 

[Diamondhead]

It doesn't make tons of money, usually. It's rare a cheap movie will have the number of screens to get tons of money, unless it wins a lot of awards, word of mouth is strong and the average for screen grows so muche that theatre owners ask for that movie.
But rarely today with money coming from worlwide boxoffice, DVD sales and rentals and those coming from the TV right sales, a movie will end up in red.

You’re probably right
As for DVDs too many false copy are being sold in big popular stores out there
I’m outraged because I bought a copy of superman returns a few weeks ago and I pretty sure I’ve been had!
The DVD is not that clear ad it looks like a fake
I’m going to warn the authority about this!
I know they caught a band of counterfeiters with over forty thousand fake DVDs last week .
I hope it was them.

 

[Ita-KalEl]

SR cost 204m. It broke even with the box office ($391m ww), but to be profitable it needed the hv market, the sponsorships and the merchandise/toys.

The problem of the budget it's a real problem, but not only for the Superman franchise. Every year we have 10-12 high-budget movies, but only few of them cross the 200m mark. The Fantastic Four was a good success because the budget was of "only" 100m, even Batman Begins had problems with its $150m budget.

I don't know how much better a sequel can do.
X-Men did $296,250,053 ww with a budget of $75 million
X2 did $407,557,613 ww with a budget of $110 million
X3 did $458,753,312 with a budget of $210 million

They are three great blockbusters, but it's clear that you can't improve the budget and hope to improve proportinally the b.o. total gross.
X3 was less profitable than the first X-Men movie.

IMO the choice of limiting the budget it's inevitable for the all the most important franchises.

 

[explode7]

How much did SR make on DVD?

 

[Pickle-El]

How much did SR make on DVD?

Billions.

 

[Freddy_Krueger]

Billions.

No wait...




Trillions.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

SR cost 204m. It broke even with the box office ($391m ww), but to be profitable it needed the hv market, the sponsorships and the merchandise/toys.

The problem of the budget it's a real problem, but not only for the Superman franchise. Every year we have 10-12 high-budget movies, but only few of them cross the 200m mark. The Fantastic Four was a good success because the budget was of "only" 100m, even Batman Begins had problems with its $150m budget.

I don't know how much better a sequel can do.
X-Men did $296,250,053 ww with a budget of $75 million
X2 did $407,557,613 ww with a budget of $110 million
X3 did $458,753,312 with a budget of $210 million

They are three great blockbusters, but it's clear that you can't improve the budget and hope to improve proportinally the b.o. total gross.
X3 was less profitable than the first X-Men movie.

IMO the choice of limiting the budget it's inevitable for the all the most important franchises.

Exactly, you've hit the nail on the head there buddy, people saying SR was a flop or not profitable need to wake up to the real world.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

SR cost 204m. It broke even with the box office ($391m ww), but to be profitable it needed the hv market, the sponsorships and the merchandise/toys.

Noooo, mi deludi anche tu. E sei pure del campo.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Exactly, you've hit the nail on the head there buddy, people saying SR was a flop or not profitable need to wake up to the real world.

I agree and the people saying that SR wasn't a box office disappointment and did as well as can be expected need to do the same.

 

[buggs0268]

How can SR have performed to expectations when Alan Horn, Pres. and COO of WB Entertainment Inc., has said himself that SR should have made at least $100 mil more at the box office?

Alan Horn: "I thought it was a very successful movie, but I think it should have done $500 million worldwide," Horn said. "We should have had perhaps a little more action to satisfy the young male crowd."

link: http://comics2film.com/ProjectFrame.php?f_id=52&f_page=13

He is shoveling it out to keep his job now.