Sequels The Official Mike Dougherty & Dan Harris Thread

[FlawlessVictory]

Wow...I think Horn, Robinov and Lin were idiotic in the first place for having unrealistic spiderman type of box office expectations from the get go.

Thats there own damn fault.....

Why is it so unrealistic? Superman is probably the most popular superhero in the world. With the right combination of a compelling story, ground breaking action and a great villain to fight, a Superman movie could pull in HUGE numbers.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

what makes me sad is singer abandoning X3 to brett ratner and making a lackluster SR.

That really irritates me. Singer managed to ruin two franchises.

 

[matrix_ghost]

Despite being "The WOrld's Greatest Comic Magazine" FF is not the crossover concept that Superman is. I think studio expectations for FF were met, plus they felt they could do a better film in a sequel, and I think they did.

The problem is that the world in which SR exists is a millstone to future films in and of itself. FF just needed to be a better film, SR has a conceptual flaw inherent in it's approach to the character and his world.

Which was the point that i was making. Had Superman Returns made more money , then we'd get a sequel sooner instead of this kind of news.
The higher the BO for SR would've been , the faster you'd hear the news that we'd get a sequel. That is the same reason why we are getting TDK. The studio demands were met , the movie made a profit , it got positive critical reviews as well as big support from the comic book fans.

 

[Showtime]

Indeed. Look no further then then Fantastic Four which , despite mostly negative reviews and with many comic boog fans outright hating it , still got a sequel

...because it turned a profit at the box office right?

 

[Showtime]

I think the split indicates potential/ faith in a sequel in the same direction. If it made 500 and the fans were split WB would still have to re-think it. It's about potential for the next film. No matter how much a first film made, if there are indcations that the core fan base is not interested in what comes next, then a studio will certainly move more slowly.

Think about Spider-Man 3. THere is a contingent of fans that did not like it and it has certainly turned off a number of them. There is talk of SM4. But the reaction from the fans, despite huge box office was not overwhelmingly positive. While it contains bigger issues, like director, cast etc.... It's not like SM4 is a go already. IF we get a SM4 with Raimi and Maguire etc... It will be a different kind of film than 3 or 2, because they will have learned something from SM3- despite huge initial BO, fans are looking for something different in another outing.

If a studio doesn't think a sequel is going to make money, then they move slowly. Core fan base can be yelling and screaming, but if the 1st film made money then you can bet a sequel will be soon to follow.

It's money.

 

[matrix_ghost]

...because it turned a profit at the box office right?

Precisely. And good profit i might add. 100 million budget ultimately led to 330 million WW at the BO
Same thing with X1. Cost about 75 million and 296 million WW.

Money talks in Hollywood and certain characters need to pull of big numbers. Superman is such a character.

 

[That'ssuper!]

With thia, the Donnerverse vanishes from the stretches of the universe and Superman fans everywhere can breathe a collective sigh of relief. Turn in next time kiddies to see what happens next on Superman is Saved.

 

[mego joe]

If a studio doesn't think a sequel is going to make money, then they move slowly. Core fan base can be yelling and screaming, but if the 1st film made money then you can bet a sequel will be soon to follow.

It's money.

Money, yes. But didn't SR gross more than BB? It's been argued that SR didn't net as much b/c it had to recoup all the false start money from failed projects.

Doesn't it have just as much to do with sequel potential? WB have faith in a BB sequel but not so much with an SR sequel? WHy b/c SR grossed MORE than BB? THat doesn't make any sense. There are other factors that play into it. In the end it's all about BO and return on investment. Obviously, WB felt that in addition to the gross on BB there was significant potential for a sequel, but despite a higher gross on SR they didn't/ don't feel the same way.

In the end the studio is looking at the highest profit it can make, but simply looking at the gross of the first film is not the only indicator. It's a factor, but potential has to be analyzed along with public opinion, us fan-boy whack jobs and other things we're probably not privy to.

 

[Showtime]

Money, yes. But didn't SR gross more than BB? It's been argued that SR didn't net as much b/c it had to recoup all the false start money from failed projects.

Doesn't it have just as much to do with sequel potential? WB have faith in a BB sequel but not so much with an SR sequel? WHy b/c SR grossed MORE than BB? THat doesn't make any sense. There are other factors that play into it. In the end it's all about BO and return on investment. Obviously, WB felt that in addition to the gross on BB there was significant potential for a sequel, but despite a higher gross on SR they didn't/ don't feel the same way.

In the end the studio is looking at the highest profit it can make, but simply looking at the gross of the first film is not the only indicator. It's a factor, but potential has to be analyzed along with public opinion, us fan-boy whack jobs and other things we're probably not privy to.

No, Batman Begins made less than Superman Returns, but Batman Begins had a smaller budget, thus it turned a profit. That is why it is getting a sequel. WB made money at the box office with Batman, but not with Superman. It's not really rocket science for these studios.

 

[Nightwing1977]

Why is it so unrealistic? Superman is probably the most popular superhero in the world. With the right combination of a compelling story, ground breaking action and a great villain to fight, a Superman movie could pull in HUGE numbers.

Batman is more popular than Superman (or at least almost equal) & it didn't made huge numbers either. In fact, SR made better profit WW than Batman Begins.

That really irritates me. Singer managed to ruin two franchises.

He didn't ruin X-Men thought. After all, X2 was from him & that was consider one of the top 10 best comic book movies ever made. I want to see if he get different writers & improve SR2 to SR like he did with X2 to X-Men. I think it can be done. He should make the story better, use some more action, different villians, & using his own vision instead of another Donner's homage.

 

[Stringer]

Good news, no more weeping, soft ass Superman....hopefully

 

[daywalker2007]

i just want Brandon Routh back as superman,

if they dont bring him back i will be really dissapointed

 

[X-Maniac]

Batman Begins cost $150m and made $372m, a profit of $222m.

Superman Returns cost $270m and made $391, a profit of $121m.

So BB made $100m more in profit. That does matter to the studios.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

I want Alex Proyas to direct this. Apparently he was the runner-up in case Singer didn't do it originally.

 

[dark_b]

Money, yes. But didn't SR gross more than BB? It's been argued that SR didn't net as much b/c it had to recoup all the false start money from failed projects.

Doesn't it have just as much to do with sequel potential? WB have faith in a BB sequel but not so much with an SR sequel? WHy b/c SR grossed MORE than BB? THat doesn't make any sense. There are other factors that play into it. In the end it's all about BO and return on investment. Obviously, WB felt that in addition to the gross on BB there was significant potential for a sequel, but despite a higher gross on SR they didn't/ don't feel the same way.

In the end the studio is looking at the highest profit it can make, but simply looking at the gross of the first film is not the only indicator. It's a factor, but potential has to be analyzed along with public opinion, us fan-boy whack jobs and other things we're probably not privy to.

for christ sake how many times do we have to say that the budget of BB was 150 milions and not 200 milions.

 

[DrunkSquirrel]

Well, at least there is still signs of life for the sequel. The fact the studio is looking for a new writer(s) is promising. The fact it will be a direct sequel and not a restart is promising to the fans of SR.

 

[Superman_]

To behonest I am torn about how I feel about this because while I did like Superman Returns I do feel they should have done a restart to the movie much like Batman Begins. Personally I think they screwed them self over when they gave Superman a child.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Batman is more popular than Superman (or at least almost equal) & it didn't made huge numbers either. In fact, SR made better profit WW than Batman Begins.

I disagree. I think worldwide Superman is still more popular than Batman. I bet more people can tell you Superman's secret identity than they can Batman's. Then again, I have no scientific numbers to back this up, just the feeling that I get.

He didn't ruin X-Men thought. After all, X2 was from him & that was consider one of the top 10 best comic book movies ever made. I want to see if he get different writers & improve SR2 to SR like he did with X2 to X-Men. I think it can be done. He should make the story better, use some more action, different villians, & using his own vision instead of another Donner's homage.

I should have been clearer in my post. I enjoyed X1 and I loved X2, definitely one of my favorite comic book movies. He ruined that franchise when he left, then he ruined Superman when he took that project on.

 

[DarkSuperman]

^^^

Sounds about right. t:

Although...I don't know how many more of his "Reimagining" of characters that I could take. Rogue personality in the X-Films still irritates me. He sucked out all her southern charm, nixed her ****tiness and made her Jubilee. I have some other issues with the films, but I'll keep those to myself.

 

[Grinder]

I should have been clearer in my post. I enjoyed X1 and I loved X2, definitely one of my favorite comic book movies. He ruined that franchise when he left, then he ruined Superman when he took that project on.

You forgot the 2 solo flicks that would've happened also: Flash and Wonder Woman. Not even talking about all the possible other solo films and an actual "World's Finest" film leading into the "Justice League".

If his movie would've worked, WB wouldn't have to take a short cut now and just throw all of them into one film.

Thanks Bryan!

 

[nintendo nerd]

You forgot the 2 solo flicks that would've happened also: Flash and Wonder Woman. Not even talking about all the possible other solo films and an actual "World's Finest" film leading into the "Justice League".

If his movie would've worked, WB wouldn't have to take a short cut now and just throw all of them into one film.

Thanks Bryan!

Oh yeah, poor WB. Singer was probably pointing a gun at Horn to give him 230 million dollars. For a movie that lacks action and a Super villian. Singer of course is responsible for a lot of things. But WB is as responsible for green lighting this project and give Singer all that money.

 

[El Payaso]

To behonest I am torn about how I feel about this because while I did like Superman Returns I do feel they should have done a restart to the movie much like Batman Begins. Personally I think they screwed them self over when they gave Superman a child.

I always thought of it as something like that, even when not going too much into the origin details. nd simply HATED the ideas of a Dponner-based idea until I saw the actual movie and felt it was a more serious Donner version. But, as the 'new version' idea sounded natural from the beginning, I don't think I'd be against that. But as for the origin I doubt it would be better than Donner's and I have doubts now of what studios could think about what a new Superman movie should be, I mean after Spiderman and Hulk, could have good results. First things I heard about the new Hulk movie, after Ang Lee's attempt, was it was "light" and that "Banner was going to come to an understanding [or something like that] with his alter ego" which are two things that would be horrible for a Hulk movie.

 

[Super Kal]

it is the WB's fault for putting their trust in a man that can't get out of the 70's

 

[nintendo nerd]

it is the WB's fault for putting their trust in a man that can't get out of the 70's

Exactly. Did WB even read the script? Didn't they realize it was very similar to STM? Didn't they read there wasn't an spectacular fight?

 

[Nightwing1977]

You forgot the 2 solo flicks that would've happened also: Flash and Wonder Woman. Not even talking about all the possible other solo films and an actual "World's Finest" film leading into the "Justice League".

What the hell does Singer doing SR has to do with Flash & WW not being made? Both Goyer & Whedon left on their own. Singer's SR has nothing to do with it. I can't help but laugh at people thinking Singer deserve to be blame for everything. Sorry, but Flash & WW not being made is just the 2 men I mention left on their own. Singer has nothing to do with it. Personally, I'm glad Goyer left Flash. He was going to direct it & I didn't want him to pull another "Blade: Trinity". His script is good when a talent director make some change to it as we saw what Nolan did. That why Nolan's brother did the script for TDK instead of Goyer. Goyer just wrote the story & not the script like he did with BB this time.

And FlawlessVictory, I blame Fox for Singer leaving X-Men. I think he wanted a break after X2, but Fox wanted a new one right away. They wouldn't even give him more money for the first film (which cost $75 millions). That why it was very short & that they couldn't use both Beast and Blob. Singer shouldn't leave X-Men, but Fox probably put pressure on him that he couldn't stand of them anymore. You should've explain me a little more clearer on you talking about he ruin X-Men in term of movies, not leaving it.