The Amazing Spider-Man The Amazing Spider-Man: Box Office Thread - Part 1

[Tony Stark]

That is only how people who want to over-exaggerate view properly continuing. Seriously, some of the limited ways people seem to think SM4 would have played out in actuality is far more charaicature than based on anything else, and using that method doesn't make your point valid. Only shows your bias.

And my loose SM4 idea (like BF) would have had an entirely different feel. Thus, making that point even more invalid to my comment.

I totally agree. And it's like people have totally forgotten how there were 20 Bond films before they ever thought to reboot that series, with 5 different actors. Some films were successful, some weren't but that was the definition of a franchise. Now everyone wants to make a trillogy and then reboot. Comic books are a medium that begs for a long running series.

 

[solidsnake86]

That is only how people who want to over-exaggerate view properly continuing. Seriously, some of the limited ways people seem to think SM4 would have played out in actuality is far more charaicature than based on anything else, and using that method doesn't make your point valid. Only shows your bias.

And my loose SM4 idea (like BF) would have had an entirely different feel. Thus, making that point even more invalid to my comment.

True, but at some point I just think film series lose their appeal when you start getting to a fourth movie with the same cast and what not. Spider-man 4 would have really gone nowhere story wise for peter and mj. They exhausted the groundwork they laid over the course of the 3 films and tied in up decently, regardless of everyones opinion of the third movie.

It was a huge risk to retell the origin but if sony can turn this into a new 3 film franchise, from a business standpoint, its a success.

 

[rayc1971]

I thought Sony already greenlighted a sequel even before ASM comes out?

they did already greenlight a sequel but it doesnt mean they cant call it off if this bombs.if sony is not happy with the numbers remember this movie has 230mill budget not counting maketing.i think sony would like this to make 300mill domestic or close to it.remember how they said this movie was going to be alot cheaper than spidey3 wich was 258mill.28mill really not that much cheaper i guess the lizard cgi was alot of coin maybe if they use green goblin the sequel can have a lower budget.

 

[spider-neil]

One possible upside for a relatively small box office take is they may decide to use a villian that is relatively easy to achieve (read cheaper), for example Electro who only needs electricity effects and also they use more practicle effects for Spidey (because they were easily the most effective in the movie).

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

I haven't been keeping up with the box office take for the movie. I hear that the take was a little underwhelming for Sony, though. Can someone fill me in?

 

[spider-neil]

Spidey will certainly make more than 500m world wide and this is enough to green light a sequel. I also think with this relatively low take, Sony will definately be up for Spidey appearing in the Avengers.

 

[psylockolussus]

The domestic box-office for ASM for its first week is good. This movie should get at least $275 million in its final run and $700 million worldwide.

 

[Spiderdevil]

Whether that be SM4 or a loose reboot like TIH, it was clear people didn't want to see SM1.2. The signs were there as soon as it was announced...yet they drudged on and voila...a likely $250 million domestic take for a film that cost nearly that much to make. It could have done soo much better at the box office.

Thats like saying BB wasnt needed

FFS it made just 370M world wide.Thats Pathetic money!!

 

[Spiderdevil]

Funnilier enough, Sony made less money than if they would have done SM4. Isn't that rofl worthy? The overseas audience would have eaten up SM4 just as much as this movie. Here, it's doing just alright...much like the critical response on the quality of the movie.

Nope

 

[Spiderdevil]

I'm not saying that Batman Begins did better than ASM, I'm just saying that Batman Begins made more money in its first 6 days than any of the Batman movies (at that time) and that it domestically outgrossed 3 out of his 4 predecessors.

ASM on another hand made less money in its first 6 days than any of the previous Spider-Man movies and has now no chance at all to outgross them (domestically).

From a business perspective, that's basically growth vs decay.

Thats a pathetic comparison
Riami's movies grossed 2.5Billion plus and it would always have been very very difficult to top that than the batman movie before BB

For Example if Batman gets rebooted after a number of years,it would be a near impossible task to top Nolan,but that doesnt mean that movie would be **** or something

 

[Spiderdevil]

2014 is too quick a turn around for a back to back production. The third film would need to finish filming before the second one is even out and with a two year window or much less (May 2014 release) that would be insane.

At this point, considering a Lizard solo movie cost as much (yes he is organic but still), a Goblin movie is going to cost way more. How can they go south of the budget from the first film and expect to maintain the "event" feel a Spidey movie is supposed to have?

Wont cost a lot more than this
Probably 240-250 million

 

[Spiderdevil]

You know i'm a fan of the 1st 2 especially SM2 but S3 was terrible. So i was not totally dead set against a reboot but when i discovered the reboot was another origin with high school peter parker i felt insulted.

I mean that's what the last franchise did! Give me something new, i always felt it was a shame we haven't gotten the adult peter parker in a film yet.

So when it turned out they were just doing a retread i was like:

I mean where can they go with this franchise? I mean garfield will be 30 by the next film will they still have him in HS? So we get college peter again oh and with the gg too so that is really new.

So you call it too similar before even the script has been finalised and not a single scene has been shot!!

Dude you are worse than Devin Faraci

 

[Spider-Fan]

I totally agree. And it's like people have totally forgotten how there were 20 Bond films before they ever thought to reboot that series, with 5 different actors. Some films were successful, some weren't but that was the definition of a franchise. Now everyone wants to make a trillogy and then reboot. Comic books are a medium that begs for a long running series.

Exactly. You easily can keep these franchises going Bond style. I think the reboot trend lends itself to non-creativity.

True, but at some point I just think film series lose their appeal when you start getting to a fourth movie with the same cast and what not. Spider-man 4 would have really gone nowhere story wise for peter and mj. They exhausted the groundwork they laid over the course of the 3 films and tied in up decently, regardless of everyones opinion of the third movie.

It was a huge risk to retell the origin but if sony can turn this into a new 3 film franchise, from a business standpoint, its a success.

Once again, easily rectified. Just make films about Spider-Man without referencing the previous films and put your own characters/love interest in the movie. Problem solved via loose sequel

 

[AvengeME]

How many loose sequels do you think they could have squeaked out before we got into Batman and Robin territory though? Indefinitely? I don't see that. Batman clearly ran out of gas at some point, and Spiderman is not as popular at least domestically.

So if WB were to take the same approach of loose sequels after TDKR, how do you tackle it? Mr. Freeze? Clayface? Ras Al Ghul ressurrected? I don't know how they will approach that either.

 

[Spider-Fan]

How many loose sequels do you think they could have squeaked out before we got into Batman and Robin territory though? Indefinitely? I don't see that. Batman clearly ran out of gas at some point, and Spiderman is not as popular at least domestically.

So if WB were to take the same approach of loose sequels after TDKR, how do you tackle it? Mr. Freeze? Clayface? Ras Al Ghul ressurrected? I don't know how they will approach that either.

If you keep making good movies, it can be done indefinately. Batman only lost steam because they made poor films after recasting. Keep making good ones, and you can keep going.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

How many loose sequels do you think they could have squeaked out before we got into Batman and Robin territory though? Indefinitely? I don't see that. Batman clearly ran out of gas at some point, and Spiderman is not as popular at least domestically.

So if WB were to take the same approach of loose sequels after TDKR, how do you tackle it? Mr. Freeze? Clayface? Ras Al Ghul ressurrected? I don't know how they will approach that either.

Yes. Yes. Yes. All three are viable options. Clayface especially I'd be interested in since he's both a great character and a fresh one.

 

[JKKS085]

Thats a pathetic comparison
Riami's movies grossed 2.5Billion plus and it would always have been very very difficult to top that than the batman movie before BB

For Example if Batman gets rebooted after a number of years,it would be a near impossible task to top Nolan,but that doesnt mean that movie would be **** or something

And that is a stupid *ss answer.

2.5 Billions in 3 films just pretty muched proves how popular the character is.
You obviously still don't understand what I'm talking about. I'm just talking business here (not quality or anything else).

Batman Begins financial results lead WB to think, back in 2005, that they could finally make more money out of the franchise because it was a financial (and critical) improvement over previous installments.

ASM B.O. will likely be an issue for Sony, even though they probably won't lose any money, because it'll make them think that they will have to settle for less than what they earned with the Raimi franchise (despite the ticket price inflation and 3D).

From a business perspective, especially when it comes to such a high profile character, that's just not good.

 

[spider-neil]

The fact this movie was treading old ground can't and shouldn't be ignored. If the sequel has a similar low take then it's time to be concerned. You can't expect the general audience to come out in their droves to watch something they have already seen, this is why ASM should avoid GG and Doc Ock in ASM 2 at all costs.

 

[Spiderdevil]

And that is a stupid *ss answer.

2.5 Billions in 3 films just pretty muched proves how popular the character is.

That and how good the movies were despite people bashing them for the sake of it to make TASM look good

You obviously still don't understand what I'm talking about. I'm just talking business here (not quality or anything else).

Okay,I would give you an example.Suppose Batman is rebooted in 2020,its a given that it would not make more than nolan's franchise.That doesnt mean WB will look at business standpoint and all that **** and say its a huge loss or something
Sony already knew it wont make more than Riami

Batman Begins financial results lead WB to think, back in 2005, that they could finally make more money out of the franchise because it was a financial (and critical) improvement over previous installments.

Its hardly an improvement improving upon the previous Batman movies compared to Riami's movie which is the best CB trilogy as of yet(untill TDKR comes out atleast)
The highest grossing Batman movie before BB earned 411M,all 3 Spidey earned more than double of that figure.And BTW BB couldnt even beat that 411 gross
Unlike BB,TASM was facing a uphill battle from the start if it wanted to better Riami

 

[JKKS085]

First off I was talking domestic gross, not worldwide grosses.

Your example of a potential Batman relaunch is interesting, of course it'll be a problem for WB to have a profitable franchise (wich wasn't the case back in 2005) significantly decaying with a wonky reboot that also received mixed reviews. And I won't say it's a given that it'll make much less than Nolan's installements. Just make an actually interesting movie and people will root for it.

I mean TASM will likely make just bit more than half of what the first Spider-Man earned back in 2002 (if you adjust the grosses for ticket price inflation of course) with an A-List character that is freaking a cultural phenomenon (wich wasn't the case either in 2002).

No matter how hard the challenge was (and honestly Spider-Man's opening numbers are hardly up to today's standards for a blockbuster), with a genre that is getting more and more popular (hence the record breaking successes of The Dark Knight and The Avengers), with the ticket price inflation and 3D, TASM's 6-days opening should have been at the very least in the tracks of the first Spider-Man to be an actual success (and that's what Sony expected).

I can't be the only one surprised that after 3 pretty well-received movies (and financially highly successful installements), a comic book movie featuring an highly popular, A-List character won't even reach the domestic numbers of 2008 Iron Man (wich was barely a C-List character by the time the movie came out).

 

[spider-neil]

One 'small' upside to a low box office take is they will rush the movie to DVD/Blu ray

 

[JKKS085]

The main downside being that Sony will leave even less creative control to whoever will direct the sequel.

 

[GuestStar2004]

problem with this film is it was sonys make or break film so it had to be well recieved or make a profit

if it didnt they wouldnt have alot of choice but to either give spiderman up or do another reboot or make a incredibly low bucket film like they did with ghostrider

so i do worry they took to much notice of fans and said to webb no we cant risk it change that and redo that

 

[AF3619]

The main downside being that Sony will leave even less creative control to whoever will direct the sequel.

wait..Marc Webb in´t directing the sequel?

 

[Jexx]

Webb is most likely directing the sequel.