Iron Man 2 The Iron Man 2 Box Office Prediction Thread

[FaT_tONle]

And here we go,AGAIN...how do you know that TFA:CA is going to be overlooked? Nvm,you shouldn't get worked up about it just yet. It's too early for that,you should at least wait until the trailers and marketing begin for TFA:CA,After,before the movie is out. And after the movie is released. All of it will be the final test.

Said the same thing about TIH... and now IM2... look at the way it was marketed. It was supposed to be the runaway hit of the year. Why was it marketed as a typical 1st week of May popcorn movie? Maybe the movie just wasn't that good; that's a distinct possibility. But there wasn't anything there to say you were totally missing out on something special. Outside of the December teaser I didn't see anything until April tbh... with that said, I don't know what else we can expect them to do. They are losing this distribution thing after Avengers, or maybe IM3. They are not going to go out of their way to get the word out. With all the movies out in 2011/2012, doing the bare minimum will be an epic fail, that's all there is to it.

Oh and by the way,Bay only did it for 2011 because he didn't want certain people at Paramount to get fired,he said so himself months ago.

Awesome... now Bay is a philanthropist that cares about other people's jobs...

 

[Anita18]

Awesome... now Bay is a philanthropist that cares about other people's jobs...

Hey give him SOME credit now. He likes puppies...

http://www.cinematical.com/2010/09/02/michael-bay-puppies-river/

 

[JeetKuneDo]

The real story for Inception has been its international performance. Some posters on boxofficemojo are making conservative prediction of $500m given its great performance in China.

Gotta give thanks to Inception for forcing some people to acknowledge the worldwide gross that was being aggressively ignored for IM2.

Cap should feel like an event. Now it's going to be another Marvel movie that will be overlooked by TF and Potter. TF3 should have never been in 2011 anyway. They must have paid Bay a **** load to fast track it. Pure greed move, and everyone is basically hoping it flops.

Hope you are wrong about that. I'll admit that I'm not anxiously awaiting the Cap movie myself in comparison to Thor and GL...it needs some sort of boost.

As for hoping the next TF movie flops due to poor quality...that hasn't made a dent in the TF franchise so far. Hard to imagine how Bay could make them any worse than he already has.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I never ignored the international numbers. The international numbers were the only interesting numbers that the movie put up.

I predict that the 3rd movie will probably do better than the second internationally but domestically, atleast a 30mil drop.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I never ignored the international numbers. The international numbers were the only interesting numbers that the movie put up.

I predict that the 3rd movie will probably do better than the second internationally but domestically, atleast a 30mil drop.

It was certainly hard to get anyone around here to admit IM2 made more money than IM1, I can tell you that! There was an almost pathological focus on the domestic number (which I noticed you returned to quite quickly yourself). Inception doesn't seem to having the same problem getting people to notice the worldwide numbers. You probably wouldn't catch anyone describing its international numbers like you just did with IM2 either. ("the only interesting numbers the movie put up") I'm sure you didn't mean that to sound like you were taking a swipe at the movie with a back-handed compliment, right?

If IM3 fell domestically that would mirror what happened to the Spider-Man franchise so that's not a bad prediction. Although IM2 did hold domestically better than Spider-Man 2 did so you can never tell. (SM2 fell 7%, IM2 fell 0.1%)

 

[Bruce Malone]

Well spider-man 3 has the best international numbers of any super-hero movie. So i suppose some are hesitant to gauge good international numbers as a victory for a comic film.

 

[El Payaso]

Well spider-man 3 has the best international numbers of any super-hero movie. So i suppose some are hesitant to gauge good international numbers as a victory for a comic film.

 

[marcvader]

Good to see that this thread is back to the IM2 BO take.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It was certainly hard to get anyone around here to admit IM2 made more money than IM1, I can tell you that! There was an almost pathological focus on the domestic number (which I noticed you returned to quite quickly yourself). Inception doesn't seem to having the same problem getting people to notice the worldwide numbers. You probably wouldn't catch anyone describing its international numbers like you just did with IM2 either. ("the only interesting numbers the movie put up") I'm sure you didn't mean that to sound like you were taking a swipe at the movie with a back-handed compliment, right?

If IM3 fell domestically that would mirror what happened to the Spider-Man franchise so that's not a bad prediction. Although IM2 did hold domestically better than Spider-Man 2 did so you can never tell. (SM2 fell 7%, IM2 fell 0.1%)

I never ignored the international numbers, the domestic numbers are more important to the studios thus I talked about them more. And you can't compare a franchise in which the first movie made 400mil to a franchise in which the first one made 300mil. I've said that before and I'd just thought I'd say it again. The apt comparasion for Iron Man is the Pirates and Transformers franchise. Spidey was a franchise with no room for growth to because the first movie was so huge. The 3rd one would have obviously made more than the second if it wasn't for it sucking, the opening showed as much. Iron Man 2 had no competition and it still fell off the face of the earth after it's opening weekend because of blah word of mouth. I see no reason to change that opinion. Call me when Iron Man 3 doesn't open to record numbers like Spider-Man 3 did. I don't know why you are angry about that because, all and all, despite the lukewarm word of mouth the movie opened so huge that it still got 620mil worldwide and a sequel is coming. I just hope that it isn't as bad as Spider-Man 3 was.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Hee hee...I knew that worldwide numbers would again become less important when the subject was IM2.

It's fun to watch it change back and forth...

"Inception!" ...."WW box office!!"
"Iron Man 2!" ..."Domestic box office!"

Well spider-man 3 has the best international numbers of any super-hero movie. So i suppose some are hesitant to gauge good international numbers as a victory for a comic film.

Don't see why. Good numbers are good numbers. That's what this thread is supposed to be about, no?

I never ignored the international numbers, the domestic numbers are more important to the studios thus I talked about them more. And you can't compare a franchise in which the first movie made 400mil to a franchise in which the first one made 300mil. I've said that before and I'd just thought I'd say it again. The apt comparasion for Iron Man is the Pirates and Transformers franchise. Spidey was a franchise with no room for growth to because the first movie was so huge. The 3rd one would have obviously made more than the second if it wasn't for it sucking, the opening showed as much. Iron Man 2 had no competition and it still fell off the face of the earth after it's opening weekend because of blah word of mouth. I see no reason to change that opinion. Call me when Iron Man 3 doesn't open to record numbers like Spider-Man 3 did. I don't know why you are angry about that because, all and all, despite the lukewarm word of mouth the movie opened so huge that it still got 620mil worldwide and a sequel is coming. I just hope that it isn't as bad as Spider-Man 3 was.

Oh let's not play the lame forum game "you're angry". Come on...

Did you notice how quickly you got back to ignoring the worldwide numbers here?

The flawed comparisons to Pirates and Transformers is why the predictions for opening weekend and every other prediction on this movie was wrong. Comparing it to other super hero movies would have avoided some of those embarrassingly mistaken predictions.

For some odd reason, a few are still using those erroneous predictions as a basis to criticize this movie...one would think predictions that bad would not be held up as proof of anything. The fact that the 2nd Pirates and Transformers movies weren't as good as the first ones and still made way more money would be a clue what a poor indicator those are of anything. The exact opposite of what has happened with super hero movies.

You say 400 million was the top end for Spider-Man. That has some merit.

Now let's look at another hero that was acknowledged to be less popular than Spider-Man both before and after his breakout hit movie.....Iron Man.

In what way is it fair to say that Iron Man...a character that is widely known to be on a lower tier than Spider-Man...should equal Spidey's box office? The truth is, 300 million is probably the top for the Iron Man character. That's completely logical and fair. If you'll remember...no one thought the Iron Man character could touch 300 million when it came out. Our memories are too short sometimes. I'm still not sure we appreciate what a rare feat 300 million is. To act like that is not a spectacular success is not correct. Go ahead and check out how many movies break 300 million each year.

So it's also logical to assume the second Iron Man movie would not equal the top end that the first one did. The same thing happened to Superman 2, Batman 2, and Spider-Man 2. That's where you look for comparisons if you don't want your predictions to look foolish. But even that's not 100% since IM2 almost equaled the first. It got closer than any of the other #2's.

We should know by now that opening weekend totals prove almost nothing. It could be that marketing was good or bad...it could be that the fan base for the movie is incapable of waiting to see it and most of them rush out immediately.

 

[hatebox]

This has been discussed to death, but what the hell - I haven't read anyone who didn't think IM2 could quite comfortably beat its predecessor domestically before it opened. And I still think it should have. The only reason it doesn't really matter is that it passed $300m, which still a pretty decent milestone. As for the intl. numbers, I again think it could have done a little better. A $40m increase is not particularly good for what is now a known and liked product, and a big chunk of that 15% jump is 2 years worth of inflation anyway.

But what else is there to be said? It made easily enough money to garner one more sequel should Avengers go ok. If anything the numbers might force Marvel to spend a little more time on the script as it proves the numbers won't drastically increase unless the film is significantly better. That's not me being a hater - it's just a statement of fact.

As for Inception, the only reason people are talking about the intl numbers is because they're huge for that kind of film. At this rate it could pass $800m WW, which no-one saw coming. Even its eventual $290m dom. total is impressive after a good but not great opening...

 

[Iron_Stark]

Our memories are too short sometimes. I'm still not sure we appreciate what a rare feat 300 million is. To act like that is not a spectacular success is not correct. Go ahead and check out how many movies break 300 million each year.

I'll take the Pepsi challenge

Going back this decade, lets see how many made more than 300 million

2010 - 3 - 300, 1 - 400
2009 - 1 - 300, 1 - 400, 1 - 700
2008 - 2 - 300, 1 - 500
2007 - 4 - 300, ZERO 400 or more
2006 - ZERO 300, 1 - 400
2005 - 1 - 300, ZERO - 400 or more
2004 - 2 -300, 1 - 400
2003 - 3 - 300, ZERO 400 or more
2002 - 2 - 300, 1 - 400
2001 - 2 - 300, ZERO - 400 or more
2000 - ZERO, no movie that year made more than 300, the highest was 260 million.

So this past decade 20 made 300 million(a huge feat onto itself) or more and only 7 made more than 400 million.

And people want to act like hitting 400 is a common occurrence and that IM2 was a disappointment and a tainted franchise because of it?

edit:

I'd also like to add, out of all of those that broke 300, 6 were superhero films, 3 were Spider-Man, 1 Batman and the other 2, you guessed it, Iron Man. Not the X-Men, not Superman, not Hulk, not Fantastic Four, not Wolverine by himself, but Iron Man.

 

[Tony Stark]

I'll take the Pepsi challenge

Going back this decade, lets see how many made more than 300 million

2010 - 3 - 300, 1 - 400
2009 - 1 - 300, 1 - 400, 1 - 700
2008 - 2 - 300, 1 - 500
2007 - 4 - 300, ZERO 400 or more
2006 - ZERO 300, 1 - 400
2005 - 1 - 300, ZERO - 400 or more
2004 - 2 -300, 1 - 400
2003 - 3 - 300, ZERO 400 or more
2002 - 2 - 300, 1 - 400
2001 - 2 - 300, ZERO - 400 or more
2000 - ZERO, no movie that year made more than 300, the highest was 260 million.

So this past decade 20 made 300 million(a huge feat onto itself) or more and only 7 made more than 400 million.

And people want to act like hitting 400 is a common occurrence and that IM2 was a disappointment and a tainted franchise because of it?

edit:

I'd also like to add, out of all of those that broke 300, 6 were superhero films, 3 were Spider-Man, 1 Batman and the other 2, you guessed it, Iron Man. Not the X-Men, not Superman, not Hulk, not Fantastic Four, not Wolverine by himself, but Iron Man.

Yeah the really interesting thing is how Iron Man has really propelled himself to being Marvel's no. 2, or darn near close to Spider-man. You can even see that in this new Avengers:Earth's mightiest Heroes animated series, the leader is Iron Man not Cap. And in other animated productions like "Next Avengers" all of the staple Avengers are dead, except for Iron Man.

I don't think any other characters in comics have propelled themselves so much in such a short amount of time. I remember people predicting an OW of 55 million for IM1.

While some may have overpredicted IM2 domestically, that's not near as much as they underpredicted (by 200% in some instances) the performance of IM1. And now you have people running around saying IM1 wasn't all that good.

I try to put aside the fanboyism that goes on here sometimes, but it's pretty sad how some people on here decided to make it their personal past time to run down IM2.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Yeah the really interesting thing is how Iron Man has really propelled himself to being Marvel's no. 2, or darn near close to Spider-man. You can even see that in this new Avengers:Earth's mightiest Heroes animated series, the leader is Iron Man not Cap. And in other animated productions like "Next Avengers" all of the staple Avengers are dead, except for Iron Man.

I don't think any other characters in comics have propelled themselves so much in such a short amount of time. I remember people predicting an OW of 55 million for IM1.

While some may have overpredicted IM2 domestically, that's not near as much as they underpredicted (by 200% in some instances) the performance of IM1. And now you have people running around saying IM1 wasn't all that good.

I try to put aside the fanboyism that goes on here sometimes, but it's pretty sad how some people on here decided to make it their personal past time to run down IM2.

I didn't think IM1 was going to make as much as it did, chalk me down as those that though it was going to make about 55 OW and 130-150 domestically. I was praying that it would get just over 180 so we could at least get one more sequel.

What also is amazing is Iron Man did it pretty much by himself, he didn't have A-list villains to help sell the movie.

Of the three villains that have been in the movies, lets see, one is dead and hasn't been seen in a comic in more than two decades, one is frozen in outer space and hasn't been seen in a comic in more than 10 years, and the last one, the true D-lister, he's been dead and hasn't been seen in more 12 years, they just now rebooted the character and based on the numbers from Diamondcomics.com no one bought the comics.

Two movies that got past 300 based on an unknown character fighting D-list villains? Yeah I'll gladly take that over the dozens of comic characters that don't even sniff that amount. The closest one to IM2 is X-Men 3 and that's at 230.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I'd also like to add, out of all of those that broke 300, 6 were superhero films, 3 were Spider-Man, 1 Batman and the other 2, you guessed it, Iron Man. Not the X-Men, not Superman, not Hulk, not Fantastic Four, not Wolverine by himself, but Iron Man.

I keep bringing this up in relation to the other SH movies coming out next year. There are some crazy predictions out there. It's very possible that none of them will break 200 million and I'll be shocked if any of them break 300 million. (shocked but very happy) I've been saying the whole time that 200 million is going to have me celebrating for any of them. I really do hope they all make that...but I doubt it. The IM2 number is going to be appreciated for what it is too late for some.

I didn't think IM1 was going to make as much as it did, chalk me down as those that though it was going to make about 55 OW and 130-150 domestically. I was praying that it would get just over 180 so we could at least get one more sequel.

What also is amazing is Iron Man did it pretty much by himself, he didn't have A-list villains to help sell the movie.

Of the three villains that have been in the movies, lets see, one is dead and hasn't been seen in a comic in more than two decades, one is frozen in outer space and hasn't been seen in a comic in more than 10 years, and the last one, the true D-lister, he's been dead and hasn't been seen in more 12 years, they just now rebooted the character and based on the numbers from Diamondcomics.com no one bought the comics.

Two movies that got past 300 based on an unknown character fighting D-list villains? Yeah I'll gladly take that over the dozens of comic characters that don't even sniff that amount. The closest one to IM2 is X-Men 3 and that's at 230.

I'll admit up front that I'm not much of an Iron Man fan. I bought a few of the comics...but I believe his title was one of the last ones I started buying. (You know how they suck you in with cross-over stories...they got me) So I'm still not sure how they pulled this off.

I have a "Marvel universe" type poster from a few years ago and Iron Man is relegated to standing behind Wolverine with his head poking around. (Spider-Man is front/center of course)

Wait...here it is:

Difficult to believe how many continue to think that character should do Spider-Man numbers.

 

[Iron_Stark]

I keep bringing this up in relation to the other SH movies coming out next year. There are some crazy predictions out there. It's very possible that none of them will break 200 million and I'll be shocked if any of them break 300 million. (shocked but very happy) I've been saying the whole time that 200 million is going to have me celebrating for any of them. I really do hope they all make that...but I doubt it. The IM2 number is going to be appreciated for what it is too late for some.

I too hope they make more than 200 million. After the ones that I listed, only four made it past 200 million, Batman Begins, Superman Returns, X2 and X3. None even made it to 235.

Comicbook movies making a ton of money isn't as easy as people would have you believe.

I'll admit up front that I'm not much of an Iron Man fan. I bought a few of the comics...but I believe his title was one of the last ones I started buying. (You know how they suck you in with cross-over stories...they got me) So I'm still not sure how they pulled this off.

I have a "Marvel universe" type poster from a few years ago and Iron Man is relegated to standing behind Wolverine with his head poking around. (Spider-Man is front/center of course)

Wait...here it is:

Difficult to believe how many continue to think that character should do Spider-Man numbers.

I've been an Iron Man fan since the dark times, when he would play third or fourth fiddle to everyone else. When his book would come out bi-monthly because sales sucked. When he was just regulated to cameos in major cross overs like DC vs Marvel, Infinity Gauntlet and others or had someone else filling in during others like Secret Wars.

So yeah, no one can tell me this movie is a disappointment or it was expected to do Spider-Man numbers.

 

[Jon Hex]

Multiple ^^^^^. Finally sensible comments. Amazing how crazy unrealistic some expectations were. Crunching numbers but forgetting reality.
Both Iron-man movies had great numbers. 300 million is no joke, under ANY circumstance.

 

[hatebox]

No, but (for the 10,000th time) expecting it to exceed its predecessor domestically was not an 'unrealistic expectation'.

I think by now there's nothing left to say on this matter. Over and out.

 

[Iron_Stark]

No, but (for the 10,000th time) expecting it to exceed its predecessor domestically was not an 'unrealistic expectation'.

I think by now there's nothing left to say on this matter. Over and out.

But expecting this to do Spider-Man numbers IS an unrealistic expectation, plain and simple.

But you're right there's nothing left to say, it made more than 300 million, 6 million less than it's predecessor, 36.6 million more WW than it's predecessor.

Call it what you want but we know it's no failure or disappointment.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The movie did disappoint, just like Spider-Man 3 did. It doesn't matter than both got over 300mil. The boxoffice is relative and the fact is Iron Man 2 made less than even the lowest predictions. It was not ridiculous to expect 350 to 400mil because the movie was in the exact same position that simular movie sequels were in. It's lower than expected opening can be blamed on marketing but it's legs were all word of mouth...which wasn't very good.

I'm not going to treat Iron Man special because it's a comicbook franchise. Also it would have been ridiculous for us to expect it to sell as many tickets as Spider-Man but it's not ridiculous for us to think that it would make 400mil.

I'm not going to look at Iron Man 2's disappointing boxoffice any differently after Thor and Captain America don't make 300mil next year because well Iron Man 2's boxoffice performance has nothing to do with those two films.

 

[Iron_Stark]

The movie did disappoint, just like Spider-Man 3 did. It doesn't matter than both got over 300mil. The boxoffice is relative and the fact is Iron Man 2 made less than even the lowest predictions. It was not ridiculous to expect 350 to 400mil because the movie was in the exact same position that simular movie sequels were in. It's lower than expected opening can be blamed on marketing but it's legs were all word of mouth...which wasn't very good.

I'm not going to treat Iron Man special because it's a comicbook franchise. Also it would have been ridiculous for us to expect it to sell as many tickets as Spider-Man but it's not ridiculous for us to think that it would make 400mil.

I'm not going to look at Iron Man 2's disappointing boxoffice any differently after Thor and Captain America don't make 300mil next year because well Iron Man 2's boxoffice performance has nothing to do with those two films.

Not ridiculous expecting this to get to 350? Point me to a superhero sequel that got to 350 not named Spider-Man or Batman. And it took Batman how many movies to crack 300? And this got to 312, quit trying to act like this got to the lower 200s. So it made 38 million less than YOUR lowest expectation, pfft, Disney can find that amount under their sofa cushions in their lobby. They're not going to lose any sleep over that amount.

Yap all you want about dissapointment, but at the end of the day it's just you're opinion which really amounts to nothing. I'm throwing out facts, you're just throwing opinions. Again, direct me to a FACT where the studio, Fiege, the director or the actors said they're disappointed.

If this was a disappointment, it would get the Fantastic Four, Daredevil, Punisher, Superman Returns, Hulk ('03) treatment. Meaning they'd get shelved only to get rebooted in the future.

SM3 disappointed because it the end product turned out bad, not because of how much money it made. Noone wanted to see a P-whipped dancing emo that cried half the movie. And the only reason SM is getting a reboot is because the studio didn't agree with Raimi's direction anymore, not because of SM3.

We'll see when Thor, Cap and Green Lantern make the money they make.

 

[ElMariachi]

There is no reason trying to reason with her bro. They have glaring biases against this movie and were clearly hoping it would fail. Now after it's been clear that Iron Man 2 was a success, they are trying to find reasons to minimize it. Not even Inception with all it's hype, TDK piggybacking, and word of mouth could top $300 million domestically (286 million). Toy Story 3 was only able to pull in $400 million with 3D and Alice in Wonderland (also in 3D) made only a bit more than Iron Man 2 did domestically. And yet, these people expected Iron Man 2 to easily make $400 million dollars plus? Why and based on what exactly? As if that sort of money for an adult movie (Avatar, TDK, Titanic) in a down economy grows on trees. This just goes to show the fanboy delusion that exists on this site.

And the fact that she is comparing SM3 to IM2 is sort of a joke. Spider Man 3 sucked. It was panned by the critics and the fans who treat the movie as a punchline. Iron Man 2, despite it's criticisms, is still viewed as a good movie. The harshest criticisms of Iron Man 2 is that it wasn't as good as IM1. Really not even close in regards to being considered a disapointment. Not to mention that SM3 forced a reboot of the entire franchise (despite huge box office take), wheras Iron Man 2 created excitment for the Marvel film universe with Thor, Cap, Avengers, and an Iron Man 3 that will be less rushed. Iron Man and Iron Man 2 created the buzz we saw at Comic Con this summer.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Yeah no kidding they have it engraved in their heads that a superhero movie making north of 300 million is a disappointment based on the many MANY movies that make that amount.

I'd like to see their definition of disappointment if none of next years superhero movies crack 200 million which is a high probability.

 

[ElMariachi]

No, but (for the 10,000th time) expecting it to exceed its predecessor domestically was not an 'unrealistic expectation'.

I think by now there's nothing left to say on this matter. Over and out.

Yes, it is . Both Spider-Man movies made less domestically than Spider-Man 1---$30 million each movie. Batman Returns was a huge dropoff after the success of the first movie. Same goes with Batman Forever to Batman and Robin. Fantastic Four 2 made less than the first movie, as did Men in Black II. Both trilogies of Star Wars failed to top the success of the first movie and by quite a bit! Same goes there too with the Harry Potter movies, Indiana Jones, The Godfather, and Back to the Future.

Compared to some of these movies, the $6-7 million dropoff is a paltry amount of money. Especially considering the recession we are in. The expectations were based on TDK making $300 million more than Begins.

 

[ElMariachi]

Yeah no kidding they have it engraved in their heads that a superhero movie making north of 300 million is a disappointment based on the many MANY movies that make that amount.

I'd like to see their definition of disappointment if none of next years superhero movies crack 200 million which is a high probability.

Exactly.

What I will never understand is their concern for how much money a studio makes. Unless the box office completely bombs and prohibits a sequel, money shouldn't even be an issue. Moviegoing trends are complex and difficult to judge/understand. At least for us. My Big Fat Greek Wedding made more than Batman Begins. The Hangover made more money than a few of the Harry Potter movies. That defies logic doesn't it? Iron Man 2 making studio pocket change less than the first isn't really even a big deal!