The END of the DC movie franchaises may be upon us...

[Kane]

Superman Returns was an amazing film but it seems to be doing badly in the Box Office despite an extremely strong marketing campaign by WB.

If SR does indeed prove unprofitable, there will likely be no sequels (given the massive budget it requires).

This may likely also convince WB to NOT continue the DC superhero movies and NOT to take chances on the lesser known heroes when Superman proved to be unpopular.

Flash, Wonder Woman, Shazam, Green Lantern etc...Big budget DC Superhero films like these likely wont happen if Superman proves unprofitable.

Even though Batman Begins will be the only ones to continue, its unlikely we'll see other DC Superheroes step up into these big budget films if Superman is a failure.......

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future.

Discuss.

 

[GL's Light]

Batman will continue as a franchise, that's for certain. And Warners will probably have another crack at Superman with a shorter, lighter, more action-packed sequel - that's as long as the worldwide gross is boosted by a good international run. If the film underperforms overseas, too, then they might fold up the Superman franchise for a while and start from scratch down the road.

SR's box office could, unfortunately, give Warners cold feet about greenlighting other superhero projects. Greenlights for Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Lantern, Shazam, and maybe even Watchmen just got a lot sketchier.

While I'm dying to see more DC superheroes make it onto the silver screen, from a hard-headed business point of view I actually think Warners might be better off waiting for a few years before launching most of their superhero films. Let the current Marvel-led cycle wind down, and then launch a new wave of DC-led superhero films in four or five years. In the meantime Warners should take advantage of the many great non-superhero properties that DC has. Let's see film versions of Sgt. Rock, The Warlord, The Sandman, The Unknown Soldier, etc.

And when Warners does launch any new DC superhero films they need to conceptualize them so that they're both great high quality films and films that work on a popcorn munching entertainment level. It's also important, for superhero films and for Hollywood's economic health in general, that the studios figure out a way to deliver great production values at a better price. They're asking for trouble with the hyper-inflation they've allowed to set in to their production budgets.

 

[Kane]

Theres also the fact that BB actually did worse than SR during its first 3 days, while silly movies like Fantastic 4 make huge revenues.

I hope this wont make WB dumb the franchaises down again...

It pisses me off that quality mature films like SR and BB do so poorly compared to that crap.

 

[GL's Light]

Well, Batman Begins got off to a slower start than Fantastic Four but ended up grossing more.

I also hope that Warners doesn't go anywhere near the campy route again. But they need to design their films to have both quality and the entertainment values that put butts in seats.

I take the long view with the superhero genre. In proper perpective, it's a genre in its infancy. My hope is that we'll get great new versions of all of these characters - DC and Marvel - over the decades to come, with filmmakers stepping up to the plate who really understand how to make superhero films that are both artistically rewarding and full of good old-fashioned entertainment value.

 

[Kane]

Sadly that likely wont be a reality if Superman fails in WB's eyes.

I really dont know what to say anymore..

 

[Lex Luthor]

It's true that SR isnt doing as great as WB execs would have hoped, but it's still early and word of mouth might get around like it did with BB and everything may turn out ok. If not, I think WB will still take a few more chances on DC franchises even if SR turns out to be something of a failure at the box office. I mean, I would hope that WB could see the potential of other DC franchises, and consider them for future films.

 

[Steelsheen]

cant you guys wait till the holiday weekend is over before ringing the death knell? its only Sunday morning for goodness sake. the partying has just begun

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

cant you guys wait till the holiday weekend is over before ringing the death knell? its only Sunday morning for goodness sake. the partying has just begun

Really, I think you'll have to see how the movie performs worldwide before declaring it a success or a failure. And anyway, they still have target release dates for the Batman and Superman sequels.

 

[The Geek Vault]

I guarentee you SR will get more money during this weekend. Since its the fourth of July soon. I would love to see a Green Lantern movie and a Flash movie in the future.

 

[dpm07]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

 

[Mysterio]

I'm hoping SR's Box Office # improves soon...for the sake of the future. Discuss.

Sadly that likely wont be a reality if Superman fails in WB's eyes.

I really dont know what to say anymore..

i'd say...quit being melodramatic over whether some comic book movies get made or not. on the list of important things in life, comic book movies, while a lot of fun, rank some where below, oh....clipping your toenails.

i'm not going to see Superman Returns. Boooorrrring. it is a rehash and he's not an exciting character.

 

[Lex Luthor]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

Well said.

 

[dnno1]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

I was very surprised to hear my brother and his wife disappointed when the saw the film last night (they were expecting more and saw some inconsistencies). I am still going to take my family to see it this afternoon though, because I am a Superman fan and I think my kids will like it.

Next time use spoilers in your post so that you won't dissapoint the folks who haven't seen the film (especially the ones overseas).

 

[JackBauer]

the movie has yet to premiere in a lot of countries (mostly because of the World Cup). not to mention DVD revenues. it may not be the smash hit WB wanted but it'll make profit, and nowadays that's the only thing a studio needs to warrant a sequel.

 

[cerealkiller182]

one bad movie will nor bring down the future of DC movies especially considering Joss Whedon, David GOyer, and chris Nolan are working pretty hard on their movies.

 

[chiefchirpa]

SR will reap big money.

As to why it won't get Spider-Man's money is because Spidey is more brightly colored than Superman and ergo, that's a good call for kids. In the sequel, Superman has to have its BRIGHT BLUE AND RED BACK. Less drama, more action.

Batman has gloomier tone. Bummer. Well compensate it with action and gadgetries. Too realistic - not so profitable. Put in more gadgets and surprises, Batman 2 is cruising on the money lane.

Oh, the next box office explosion is Spiderman 3. Mark my word. Even though Raimi doesn't like Venom as a character, Venom is there to bring in the fanboys and money.

 

[thedarks0ldier]

i'd say...quit being melodramatic over whether some comic book movies get made or not. on the list of important things in life, comic book movies, while a lot of fun, rank some where below, oh....clipping your toenails.

i'm not going to see Superman Returns. Boooorrrring. it is a rehash and he's not an exciting character.

They dont make trolls like they use to

 

[Denny67]

I think the problem with the comic movie franchises is that the pendulum swing too far in one direction or the other. You either have a bunch action with a crappy story or you have tons of character development and too little on the action.

Comic adaptations like any other film need a balance of both. Then factor in egotistical film makers and know nothing studio executives who always have to stray away from the source material and bring their own “vision” or should we say revision and or marketing plants to the party.

Result... they change who and what they think classic characters should be like on film. When that is done you will always have a big bag of mixed emotions from your movie goers. Is that really the goal here?

Call me nuts but I always thought that when the audience was made happy by a good movie experience the in turn spend money?

So far Spider-Man has been the best about staying true(ish) to the comics. In return it has been rewarded with massive profits.

Let hope that does not change and DC/WB gets a clue. I mean really. All they have to do is get the guys who write the animated stuff to help on a script and they are set.

 

[Kane]

one bad movie will nor bring down the future of DC movies especially considering Joss Whedon, David GOyer, and chris Nolan are working pretty hard on their movies.

Nolan will continue with Batman.

But I doubt WB would take chances on lesser heroes if Superman doesnt sell.

And about Goyer and Whedon, it wouldnt be the first time WB threw out scripts in production.

Look at how many scripts were scrapped for Superman over the past decade and longer.

 

[Addendum]

I might see Superman Returns, though it all depends on my ankle. I don't feel like driving a car with a third degree ankle sprain, lacking the ability to put any weight on it, and trying to navigate through a damned multiplex with crutches.

If it doesn't heal in time, I can wait for the DVD.

As for the scripts, they were scrapped because they weren't that good.

 

[Aethea]

I do not think Superman is a failure, but part of its lack of profitable intake is due to the extreme deviation from the comics--including the neck tight outfit, which is disuading a lot of people from going. It is a good story, but a great risk Bryan Singer's ego pushed him to undertake. I loved the movie, but hated the deviation from DC comics. I was also expecting a lot more than just a rehashed Donner Plot; you cannot deny the fact that Lex Luthor's maniacal plans in the movie are a mere echo of the plans in the first Donner film. I wanted a reintroduction of the Man of Steel! I wanted more power--in the magnitude of Darkseid invading earth--I dont know something greater than an improved version of the plot we saw in the Donner Film. Bryan did not take a look at the modern comics and this was his mistake. I mean Superman has really evolved and fans were expecting this evolution to translate into the movie. Sadly Singer's tunnel vision and passion for Donner's films just narrowed his focus extremely allowing the new movie to become nothing but a mere METAMOVIE (a movie about an existing movie).

 

[NotFadeAway]

Blame Singer!

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Well, people waited a long time for a Superman film, and no one wants to basically see a rehash of the original film. Furthermore, just doing the natural disasters thing is old. With today's technology, it would have been nice to see Superman fight something other than a rock, and it would have been nice to have a better storyline than Luthor and his real estate.

Today's audience deserves better than a rehash of the past, and it's being reflected in the box office. If a Superman film had been done with a great story, and a great villain other than Luthor, it would have succeeded. It's just a reflection of the times. People want more than what they had in 1978, and what worked then isn't going to necessarily work now.

If someone that really had an appreciation for Superman had done the film, it would have done better. Singer has an appreciation for the "Donner Film", and Superman is more than just that film. Look at Timm/Dini in the DCAU. Did they use "Superfriends models" or the "Donner Film" as their only sources? No! They made the animated features interesting and used other sources, and if you'd had those guys working on a live action film writing the story, rather than Harris/Daugherty, you'd have seen a great story with a great villain to complement Luthor and you'd have seen great action. This would have been reflected at the box office. You would have gotten a great Superman movie, and not a Superdad film with Superman and son.

I have to disagree. People don't know enough about Superman to understand that he has any other villians besides crashing planes, Luthor and natural disasters. The most they have seen at this point is General Zod and a few a Bizzaro rip off.

Also I hate to break it to the comic fans. But people outside of this community which is geekdom don't watch JLU, so the fact that Dini/Timm do something different doesn't make for a success model either. They hooked a lot of youngsters yes, but their shows are not racking in the kind of money we are talking about in regards to a movie.

People watch these movies based on "climates". Take X3 for example, which set off the summer with a bang. Both it and Da Vinci Code were panned by critics and movie goers alike. Much similar to the reception of Fantastic Four the previous year. Singer and his staff could have made a Superman that made Batman Begins look like Batman and Robin and audience's still wouldn've have come to see it after feeling like X3 was a waste of their money.

Nobody outside these fan boards knows anything about movies they are going to see other than what a title and preview tells them. X3 is a textbook case where an effective advertising campaign got people to see a movie that apparently no one wanted to see a second time. Superman Returns was no able to capitalize on the public however and therefore did not make the money it expected. It has nothing to do with the story, director, writer, villian or otherwise. If that were the case movies like X-Men would make no money since almost no one is familiar with the franchise.

 

[Addendum]

Hell, even as a member of these boards, I see a movie when the trailer hooks me or if I'm interested in it.

The latter part takes a while though, but then there's DVD

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Hell, even as a member of these boards, I see a movie when the trailer hooks me or if I'm interested in it.

The latter part takes a while though, but then there's DVD

Exactly. You could advertise the heck out of the worst movie of all time *cough*Titanic*cough* and make a *****load of money just because you hook everyone in for that first weekend...if you're lucky, longer.