The Official Start/Release Date & Location Thread

[Rob-el]

Dude, FOUR of those were sequels to already immensely successful franchises, SR was the first in a new franchise, it simply couldnt compete with those four no matter what. Transformers i'll give you, but i knew that would successful.

I think I addressed your points in a previous post!

 

[Rob-el]

Let's not turn this into another stupid box office thread.

Given the topic and arguments raised, posting the opening stats for the movie hardly qualify as "stupid". They are valid facts that need to be presented and understood. They may seem stupid to those who are not comfortable with them (I have no idea what your opionions are on the movie so this may or may not apply to you!) but they are facts. Lets use them to work towards correcting that what needs correction so that the next set of numbers won't leave us in the situation we are in today...Over a year after the movie was released and no idea if another one is going to be made.

 

[Rob-el]

Dude, FOUR of those were sequels to already immensely successful franchises, SR was the first in a new franchise, it simply couldnt compete with those four no matter what. Transformers i'll give you, but i knew that would successful.

Further to my point the original Superman (a first in the franchise ) did post numbers equal (adjusted for inflation) to the numbers those movies posted. This is Superman - a very well known name and commodity. Hell its was that brand name that made SR hit the numbers that it did in spite of the collective indifference the general public showed about this movie. Again I'm not slamming the movie - I'm looking at what needs to be done to help the character regain its rightful place in this genre - number 1 - no matter what is being judged!!!

 

[Excel]

Dude it opened on a Wednesday. But it had weekend days or holidays its first 7; this is a more accurate chart.

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/grossbydays.htm?days=7&p=.htm

Superman is 25th with 108 million (it says 105 because they added the dailies wrong), upon release it was 20th. See Batman Begins, way down at 48th? Notice though...only 5 of the films infront of Superman arent sequels. You cant compare Supermans opening to sequels, you just cannot. Their box office runs are almost always complete different while very predictable. Sequels OPEN BIG and then drop. Non sequels-like Superman-open ALRIGHT but less then sequels- and have better legs then sequels do.

Only 5 non sequels beat Superman, and the average gross of those 5 films is 324 million. Thats why I say it opened fine. Had it gotten the legs most non sequels gotten, it would totaled over 260 million+, which is more then the expectation, which was atleast 250 million in the U.S. But it couldn't get them due to a combo of

1. Wasnt the film people wanted
2. Pirates 2

Singers film, without Pirates 2, would have totaled in the ballpark of 230-240 million.

-Batman Begins opening week-to-total multiplier was 2.42 (205/84).
-War of the worlds opening week to total multilpier was 1.95
-Spidermans was 2.35

Given Superman Returns average drop per weekend was 24% and its incredible August legs from Imax, i'd say it would have gotten between a 2.1 and a 2.2; or between 226 million and 238 million.

It Failed expectations by about 12-24 million.

Singers film, with Pirates 2, totaled exactly 200 million.

It failed expectations by 50 million.

50 million is bigger then 12-24 million, guys.

Dissappointment either way. If they can fix both, a gross between 260 - 280 is defiently in store for Supes 2, maybe even 300 if they really get it together.

But only If.

 

[Rob-el]

Dude it opened on a Wednesday. But it had weekend days or holidays its first 7; this is a more accurate chart.

http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/grossbydays.htm?days=7&p=.htm

Superman is 25th with 108 million (it says 105 because they added the dailies wrong), upon release it was 20th. See Batman Begins, way down at 48th? Notice though...only 5 of the films infront of Superman arent sequels. You cant compare Supermans opening to sequels, you just cannot. Their box office runs are almost always complete different while very predictable. Sequels OPEN BIG and then drop. Non sequels-like Superman-open ALRIGHT but less then sequels- and have better legs then sequels do.

Only 5 non sequels beat Superman, and the average gross of those 5 films is 324 million. Thats why I say it opened fine. Had it gotten the legs most non sequels gotten, it would totaled over 260 million+, which is more then the expectation, which was atleast 250 million in the U.S. But it couldn't get them due to a combo of

1. Wasnt the film people wanted
2. Pirates 2

Singers film, without Pirates 2, would have totaled in the ballpark of 230-240 million.

-Batman Begins opening week-to-total multiplier was 2.42 (205/84).
-War of the worlds opening week to total multilpier was 1.95
-Spidermans was 2.35

Given Superman Returns average drop per weekend was 24% and its incredible August legs from Imax, i'd say it would have gotten between a 2.1 and a 2.2; or between 226 million and 238 million.

It Failed expectations by about 12-24 million.

Singers film, with Pirates 2, totaled exactly 200 million.

It failed expectations by 50 million.

50 million is bigger then 12-24 million, guys.

Dissappointment either way. If they can fix both, a gross between 260 - 280 is defiently in store for Supes 2, maybe even 300 if they really get it together.

But only If.

Rationalize all you want the impact of Pirates but bottom line even 25th was a big disappointment. I know when I read the initital returns discriptions were "good" but not "stellar" and this was menetioned in the articles. The expecations were set at "stellar" If this movie was what the public wanted and had good word of mouth it would have hit at least $300 million (to do so it would have had to perform 50% better than it did - this says volumes!)-which is the minimum WB expected from it. Any movie that has good word of mouth will overcome the competion that it is up against and find its own audience - this movie failed to do that and that is what needs to be examined to ensure any future movie will succeed. Yes it did have legs at IMAX and we need to recognize this - but also recognize that IMAX was offereing 3-D scenes that were never seen before. This movie was not a success no matter how much people want to subjectively declare it to be. Move on from denial and let's focus energies in onto what needs to be done so that this is the movie to see -which SR was not as results have shown.

 

[Excel]

lol nobody in their right mind expected a minimum of 300 million domestic

 

[bgshw44]

i did. look at transformers, 300 million, and I think superman is more popular. they need to take those elements i.e a movie for the whole family, great action and special effecrs as well as a good story and you can easily have a superman movie goss north of 300 million

 

[Rob-el]

lol nobody in their right mind expected a minimum of 300 million domestic

So you figure WB green lit a budget of $200 million plus without the expectaion that the film would do at least $300 million domestically? Come conscious son! Then again maybe that explains why you 're not as concerned about working out the problems with SR except a release date screw up and think it opened fine - you think it basically hit the finacial marks expected of it. There were expectations that this, the return of Superman the grand daddy of all superheroes to the big screen would do $300 million - guaranteed! And no I cannot not prove it but you do the business math - its pretty easy (yes overseas, ties in, etc all taken into account!)

 

[superbaby]

lol nobody in their right mind expected a minimum of 300 million domestic

before sr came out, did you honestly expect that it would only make $200mil?
nobody in their right mind expected sr couldn't make 300mil domestic.

 

[dpm07]

The release date of Superman Returns didn't have anything to do with it's lackluster performance. That's pure poppycock.

Transformers was released at approximately the same time as Superman Returns, and was not a sequel. That movie has performed much better to the general public. Primarily, because Michael Bay knows how to direct a great action movie that can make the masses come out, and Singer couldn't do that with Superman Returns.

The ingredients for a great film were there with the character. However, Singer's storyline dropped the ball, and many fans suffered through what was a lackluster and soulless film.

Transformers was visually amazing. Bay's style resonates with the public. If Singer had done Superman visually in the same manner, dropped the kid element, had a major supervillain/superhero showdown, not repeated so many of the Donner elements, and had a Luthor with Luthorcorp, or a Luthor doing something other than real estate, the movie would likely have performed better, and audiences would not be so divided.

 

[Rob-el]

lol nobody in their right mind expected a minimum of 300 million domestic

Here's a good read on SR's box office before Pirates came out. The release date was not the problem with this movie - it strated under performing from day 1...

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1209978,00.html

Box Office Report
Disappointing 'Returns'
Joshua Rich's report: The three-day and five-day totals for Bryan Singer's ''Superman'' don't live up to expectations

KATE BOSWORTH AND BRANDON ROUTH IN SUPERMAN RETURNS

By Joshua Rich Joshua Rich
Joshua Rich is a staff editor for EW.com

It was another one of those weekends at the box office when forecasters got duped, studios started spinning, and the big numbers weren't nearly as impressive as they appear. After opening with $21 million on Wednesday, Superman Returns grossed $52.2 mil over the three-day weekend, according to Sunday's estimates. Its cumulative take going into the Independence Day holiday now stands at $84.2 mil. To be sure, $84.2 mil is nothing to sneeze at — unless, of course, you consider all the hype and expectations that accompanied this movie. Oh, and the fact that the flick is said to have cost Warner Bros. upwards of $300 mil. But I won't go there just yet. I will say, however, that I think you should feel a bit sorry, dear reader and moviegoer. Shame, shame, shame. Because if more of you had gone to see Supes over the weekend, then I wouldn't have to sit here and spend time explaining how his premiere is a disappointment.

Certainly, there is some good news to report. The $52.2 mil three-day take beats out Batman Begins' $48.7 mil debut last year. And... hmm, I'm trying to come up with something else on the bright side. Can't think of much more, really. You could say that the movie's B+ CinemaScore review from audiences is nice, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not great and it doesn't foretell much repeat business.

Things go downhill from there. Superman Returns' five-day total is merely the 28th best ever. Looking at its three-day figure, among both summer bows and all-time premieres, Superman Returns doesn't even land in the top 10. Director Bryan Singer enjoyed stronger first weekends with both of the X-Men movies he cobbled together. This year alone, Cars, X-Men: The Last Stand, The Da Vinci Code, and Ice Age: The Meltdown all debuted better. And here's a sampling of some less-than-memorable fare with superior openings: Fantastic Four, Pearl Harbor, The Mummy Returns, The Hulk, and Scooby-Doo. Now, does that mean that people were more eager to see Scooby than Supes? Probably not. To be fair to Warner Bros., there are a lot of ''yeah, buts'' here. Critics love the movie. Its three-day number is diluted because many folks went to see it before the weekend began. There's that hefty $84.2 mil five-day number. We're really dealing with a highly unusual seven-day weekend here, since the film opened on Wednesday and most people are vacationing through July 4th, and by then the figure should be more than $100 mil. And so on. Then again, Superman Returns was supposed to be, like, the biggest movie of the summer, and when you start thinking about how it probably needs to earn more than $600 mil worldwide to break even, well, that now seems like an even taller building to leap in a single bound.

 

[Excel]

having the potential to do 300 million and being expected to do 300 million are 2 totally different things, guys.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Superman should always come out in the summer!

 

[Rob-el]

having the potential to do 300 million and being expected to do 300 million are 2 totally different things, guys.

...and Superman has (had?) the potential to do $300 Million and it was most certainly expected to do $300 million! And hopefully we will have an opportunity to see it hit that number again (like STM did - adjusted)!

 

[superbaby]

The release date of Superman Returns didn't have anything to do with it's lackluster performance. That's pure poppycock.

Transformers was released at approximately the same time as Superman Returns, and was not a sequel. That movie has performed much better to the general public. Primarily, because Michael Bay knows how to direct a great action movie that can make the masses come out, and Singer couldn't do that with Superman Returns.

The ingredients for a great film were there with the character. However, Singer's storyline dropped the ball, and many fans suffered through what was a lackluster and soulless film.

Transformers was visually amazing. Bay's style resonates with the public. If Singer had done Superman visually in the same manner, dropped the kid element, had a major supervillain/superhero showdown, not repeated so many of the Donner elements, and had a Luthor with Luthorcorp, or a Luthor doing something other than real estate, the movie would likely have performed better, and audiences would not be so divided.

it will not be a singer's superman movie then.

btw, i totally agree with you, if they just give what we expecting to get, the movie will perform a lot better. however, directors like singer, they love to surprise us, they hate to do the norm and alway try the new perspective. it is just an unfortunate that superman is too iconic for him to mess him up and reconstruct again.

 

[Showtime]

According to what I heard, a screenwriter is being brought in to discuss a new Superman movie, whether that be an entirely new film or a sequel to Superman Returns was far from clear. This is what the Hollywood Reporter had to say:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr...news/e3i09f751dd163aa4110d36b46a59d23839?pn=2

There are at least nine more projects that are not dated but could be slated for 2009, according to one source. But one studio tentpole, the sequel to "Superman Returns," is not so lucky. There apparently are no current plans to add the project to the slate, according to a studio source.

 

[Superman-Prime]

Well, I just lost a faith with Warner Bros. Thank you very much for giving us, SR fans, bad news.

Looks like they are planning to reboot Superman film instead of sequel of Superman Returns.

So no Brandon Routh for good. I'm not going to support the reboot of Superman film with a different actor as the future of Superman.

I repeat; I WILL NOT SUPPORT THAT REBOOT OF SUPERMAN! EVER.

 

[That'ssuper!]

Glad to hear it, SR has too much of an outdated storyline to continue for a contemporary audience which demands much more of everything now.

 

[Lighthouse]

Playing devils advocate, but as far as I can tell, it only looks like it won't be on the 2009 slate. Which was kind of obvious already.

 

[Showtime]

Yeah I do need to have that title changed.

 

[Mister J]

At least there's discussion of another Superman solo flick, which I desperately want to see done. I'd prefer they kept Brandon, but they could scrap everything else. A different type of Supes film is needed.

 

[Lighthouse]

At least there's discussion of another Superman solo flick, which I desperately want to see done. I'd prefer they kept Brandon, but they could scrap everything else. A different type of Supes film is needed.

Really? From the looks of the article, there is no talk of anything happening.

 

[Mister J]

I was going off the initial part of Show's post, which echoed some things I read elsewhere about some activity in that area. It's more me hoping that anything concrete.

 

[Agentdemon]

So no Brandon Routh for good. I'm not going to support the reboot of Superman film with a different actor as the future of Superman.

I repeat; I WILL NOT SUPPORT THAT REBOOT OF SUPERMAN! EVER.

Oh no, A SR fan who won't support a possible reboot!!! What will the studio do now?

 

[Super_Ludacris]

Im not so sure if we even need a Superman movie. Reboot, Sequel, or team-up.

Just move on WB...