The Kick-Ass Thread

[animexcel]

Yeah some of those questions we've heard her answer them hundreds of times already. She looked pretty annoyed but tried to keep it humorous at the same time.

 

[Drz]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/06/business/media/06kick.html?_r=2&ref=media

2 Million copies sold.

 

[JP]

Awesome.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The DVD seems to be doing quite well, not sure how it is doing here in the UK though, but i'll bet its doing well, god this movie deserves it so much.

 

[LegendaryCaleb]

More proof that they should make a sequel!

 

[Ipodman]

I bet the sequel is coming.... but we need Kick Ass extended cut too!

 

[animexcel]

They better make the sequel fast. Chloe outgrew her Hit-Girl pants 5 inches.

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

I thought it was gonna be set a few years in the future anyway, with the city overrun by all the small-fry villains.

 

[Spider-Man '92]

I'm very curious to see how well Kick-Ass 2 does at the box office (assuming it gets made) by comparison to the first film.

 

[david icke]

^Let's hope it gets made first, but it should do better. TDK's massive BO was not only because of the publicity and hype about Ledger, but because folk who did not go to see it in the cinema because they thought it would be like the old kind of crappy Batman movies, got to see Batman Begins on dvd and tv, and realised this was a totally diff ballgame.

I love the Kick-Ass movie, and have only watched my dvd once, so i have now seen it twice, i often over watch these movies, so what I did was give my dvd to 'Cut Face Frankie', a local tramp in our area, so that he has a shaving mirror to use from now on, and the kids can go back to calling him 'Fart Smell Frankie', which I think is a little more amusing.

 

[JP]

At this point Kick-Ass 2 is a pipe dream.

 

[DACrowe]

As in no shot of ever happening? I mean there is the difficulty set up with Moretz is aging fast and they cannot begin production until at least early 2012 as Vaughn is making a (pointless) X-Men movie and that will have to be released before a script can even be written.

So, the timetable is what could kill the potential sequel. But why should that make it a pipe dream? Lionsgate is relatively happy with KA which was profittable in the BO by trippling its production budget (which they only recouped Vaughn's investors half of, anyway) at the global box office.

That isn't enough to secure a sequel, but it keeps it from bombing like the (great, but devastated) Scott Pilgrim.

Now, it is a huge hit on DVD. It was the biggest new release of August and in one month has sold 2 million copies. It is very lucrative. If they can make another one for $30 million, I imagine it will be quite doable. Hardly a pipe dream.

But if Chloe Moretz is 16 when they're ready (she'll be at least 14 at the earliest now), then yeah their window will have been missed.

 

[JP]

I don't see what Chloe aging has to do with it?

The thing is, the film hasn't been green lit. And I've yet to hear Vaughn state that that is the film he wants to do after First Class. Another thing is that Millar is under this impression that a sequel to Vaughn's film will follow his comic book sequel. I'm pretty sure Vaughn has his own ideas.

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

Kick-Ass 2 has already been confirmed guys....

 

[JP]

By whom? And don't say Mark Millar.

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

aaahh **** I read the articles wrong. my mistake.

 

[LostSon88]

Um...Vaughn says himself in the article that nothing is confirmed.

 

[VenomVsSpidey]

yeah, I realized I read it wrong. My mistake.

 

[Catman]

TDK's massive BO was not only because of the publicity and hype about Ledger, but because folk who did not go to see it in the cinema because they thought it would be like the old kind of crappy Batman movies, got to see Batman Begins on dvd and tv, and realised this was a totally diff ballgame.

TDK's success was because it's Batman. Don't forget Batmania in the `60s. Don't forget Batmania in 1989. Don't forget that Batman Returns and Batman Forever, despite critical failure, were the most successful movies of their summer.

A better example for Kick-Ass would be Blade. The first film grossed a modest $70 million, but built a cult following and the sequel did much better. It even opened to $30 million.

 

[Spider-Man '92]

^^ That seems more sound to me.

 

[david icke]

TDK's success was because it's Batman. Don't forget Batmania in the `60s. Don't forget Batmania in 1989. Don't forget that Batman Returns and Batman Forever, despite critical failure, were the most successful movies of their summer.

Batman Begins took less than Batman89 at the BO though, and then to go on to TDK's numbers? That's what I'm talking about.
A lot of people who saw BB advertised would just think back to the half assed adaptations we got 89-97, which did not really depict Batman very well, and think it was going to be be another one like that.
then they saw it on dvd and tv and realised it was a diff ballgame, and went to see the sequel at the pics.
Just as I suspect people will see KA on dvd and realise it's not some spoof comedy superhero movie like 'superhero movie', as the ads might have suggested to them, and will go see the sequel at the pics.

 

[Catman]

Batman Begins took less than Batman89 at the BO though, and then to go on to TDK's numbers? That's what I'm talking about.

Batman Begins opened with $48 million which is pretty good for a movie following in the footsteps of the much-hated Batman & Robin. The reason it didn't do much business after that is because kids didn't like it and eliminating that family audience affected it a lot. People don't realize how important that demographic is. The much-hated Spider-Man 3 managed to become the highest grossing film of 2007. Why? Because a 10-year-old isn't as nitpicky as a fanboy.

A lot of people who saw BB advertised would just think back to the half assed adaptations we got 89-97, which did not really depict Batman very well, and think it was going to be be another one like that.

You're confusing fanboys with the general public. The general public loved those first three Batman movies. Hence the huge success they had. I don't know why fanboys think that The Dark Knight is the first mega-blockbuster in the franchise. Adjusted for inflation, the 1989 version is the second most successful comic book adaptation of all-time. Not bad for a movie that was released 21 years ago.

Just as I suspect people will see KA on dvd and realise it's not some spoof comedy superhero movie like 'superhero movie', as the ads might have suggested to them, and will go see the sequel at the pics.

Kick-Ass is doing good on DVD/Blu-Ray, which is great, but I don't expect the sequel to be THAT successful. It's an R-rated movie. It's not gonna get record-breaking box office.

 

[david icke]

You're confusing fanboys with the general public. The general public loved those first three Batman movies. Hence the huge success they had. I don't know why fanboys think that The Dark Knight is the first mega-blockbuster in the franchise. Adjusted for inflation, the 1989 version is the second most successful comic book adaptation of all-time. Not bad for a movie that was released 21 years ago.

lol, i think you are the one confusing fanboys with the general public.
The reason the 89 movie was so successful was because no-one knew what a serious live action Batman movie would be like, and that trailer made it look ten times better than what it really was. People flocked to that movie because of the hype.
If they had loved it that much Batman Returns would have made more money.
The reason Batman Forever made more money than BR was because of the audience built up by 3 yrs of the animated series on prime time.

The GA may have enjoyed the first three movies, but they never loved them, never had the affection for them that they had for the first two Superman movies.
the first people I ever heard give unbashed love for the Burton movies was on this site.
edit: Put it this way, if the series was that loved, there would have been a big adverse reaction in the mainstream press to Keaton being replaced by Kilmer, as there would have been if Reeve was replaced after SMII, but there wasn't, because the BM movies were nothing more than a fun diversion for folk.

*now* people are hotly anticipating the next Batman movies.

edit: Batman and Robin turned a diverting franchise into an embaressment, and people thought, 'that was terrible, hell, the other ones weren't that great either come to think of it.' It culminated in Batman movie fatigue, which reflected on BB's BO. Once people saw it on dvd and tv and realised it was an enitirely different take on the character, they wanted to see the next one.
I think it is a good example of what could happen with KA, as there is a case of preconceptions here(as opposed to with Blade), if you did not know the comics, or were not clued up on the movie's production, from the trailers and ads you could be forgiven for thinking it was something along the lines of 'Mystery Men' or 'Superhero movie', as opposed to what it was, so people will be pleasantly surprised and it will build up an audience.

 

[LOBO3315a]

Well, I thought the movie.....kicked ass I thought Cage was great as Big Daddy, and I haven't liked him in a role for a LLLLOOOONNNGGGG time.

Hopefully a sequel gets made, and sometime before Chloe grows another 5 inches.

And for the record, when I heard Keaton was replaced as Batman, I knew the series was gonna take a dive. I've never seen anyone do the Bruce Wayne/Batman duality split like he did.

 

[Catman]

The reason the 89 movie was so successful was because no-one knew what a serious live action Batman movie would be like, and that trailer made it look ten times better than what it really was. People flocked to that movie because of the hype.

They got hyped because it's Batman. If audiences didn't care about Batman they wouldn't have gotten hyped...which goes back to my original point. TDK was a mega-success because it's Batman.

If they had loved it that much Batman Returns would have made more money.

Batman Returns was affected by soccer moms who complained about the violence. And, yet, it still managed to be the most successful movie of the summer and the third highest grossing film of the year. Not bad for a flick that upset watch-dog groups. And, by the way, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, the sequel to the mega-hit Raiders of the Lost Ark, went through the exact same situation. It was cinema deja vu.

The reason Batman Forever made more money than BR was because of the audience built up by 3 yrs of the animated series on prime time.

To begin with, B:TAS didn't last three years on primetime. It lasted like a few months in 1992. It spent most of its run in FOX's afternoon line-up. Secondly, Batman Forever is like the polar opposite of that show which you can tell by just watching the trailer. Fans of the show weren't excited for this movie. The movie was a success (#1 for summer, #2 for the year) because kids loved it and their parents (who grew up on Adam West) loved it as well.

The GA may have enjoyed the first three movies, but they never loved them, never had the affection for them that they had for the first two Superman movies.

Audiences have always enjoyed Batman more than Superman. You can tell based on hype. The first Superman, as successful as it was, got beaten at the box office by Grease. Grease! The sequel was released a week after Raiders of the Lost Ark and suffered a lot because of it. In other words, people were more excited for the latest Steven Spielberg/George Lucas creation than Superman. Then, there's Superman III, IV, and Returns which had little to no hype. Batman, on the other hand, has always been a hype machine. 4 out of the 6 installments broke the opening weekend box office record. 4 out of the 6 dominated their summer. 2 out of the 6 dominated in their year. And, Batman & Robin, believe it or not, had a very impressive opening weekend of $42 million. Adjusted for inflation, that's even better than Batman Begins. And, yet, the movie managed to flop which is a reminder of the impact that word-of-mouth has. Hulk in 2003 also suffered from poor word-of-mouth. Cinema deja vu strikes again.

the first people I ever heard give unbashed love for the Burton movies was on this site.

Really?

if the series was that loved, there would have been a big adverse reaction in the mainstream press to Keaton being replaced by Kilmer, as there would have been if Reeve was replaced after SMII, but there wasn't

Batman Returns was very controversial because of its violence. Burton and Keaton being replaced made sense and people expected it. That's why there wasn't a big fuss.