The Official Start/Release Date & Location Thread

[KRIM]

You have a point there. However, the earlier ones (from the 1980s up to mid-1990s) were mostly comedies or Disney films. It wasn't until Titanic came out that studios realized they could release big-budget fare in the winter. And even with the numerous successes with Cameron's last two films and franchise tentpoles like HP and Twilight during the winter, the studios still aren't staking out many prime winter releases for big-budget films.

I consider that a fortunate advantage for whoever is due in that slot. Spring and Summer is always crowded which leads to many of the films eating into each other's grosses. The Christmas slot allows one film (or even two) almost an entire month all to themselves. If it's a tentpole blockbuster, all the better for the cash to come in.

 

[mclay18]

Superman hitting Christmas has nothing to do with confidence or lack thereof. It has to be released by the end of the year at the latest or they'll lose their share of the rights.

I wasn't questioning why WB was releasing Superman in December 2012, I was questioning why they're pondering a Wednesday release. A Friday release would make the opening weekend look better by comparison.

*looks at the films released around that period*

Oh, so maybe the WB hopes for an Avatar-style opening and hold for Superman? It has to be really good if it hopes to reach even half that number domestically. But hey, not complaining at all.

 

[batlovescatDC]

There is always a huge "blockbuster Christmas movie" that comes out each year (usually). I think Superman could definitely be that for 2012. It's a very smart release date if you ask me. Theaters are PACKED on Christmas day with families. You put out a movie like The Man of Steel, you are gonna have a every fanboy, fangirl, mom, dad, and child seeing that movie. Smart move, WB.

 

[Catman]

You have a point there. However, the earlier ones (from the 1980s up to mid-1990s) were mostly comedies or Disney films.

That's because the winter season is also the holiday season, so it makes sense to release family friendly content. And, to this day, many of the blockbusters follow in that mold. Harry Potter is very family friendly. Especially the earlier installments. The first Chronicles of Narnia was a huge hit in 2005. Those National Treasure flicks were big hits.

Superman, compared to Batman, is very family friendly. So, it works as a holiday film. Heck, the `78 movie was a holiday release.

 

[mclay18]

^ Where does Avengers fit in there?

What are you talking about, specifically? The Avengers is coming out May 4, 2012 -- and it has a solid two weeks to itself. (Not to mention that Disney will get a full marketing blitz for their first Marvel film.) I doubt Battleship will pose a serious challenge, especially since Mi3 will crush it the week after.

Compared to TDKR and Superman, I'd say WB picked a good spot for both. The former will be the last big film of the summer, and Superman will rake in serious Christmas money like the first.

 

[Zachhelms]

December 2012 seems like the perfect time. I will be there opening night first in line.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

The Avengers...I don't know...still wondering if that might move. That thing should have gotten going by now and I've read conflicting reports as to when that starts filming; some had this spring, others said fall. Now they're casting a separate actor for the angry green giant in addition to Ruffalo when that should have already been done quite a ways back.

 

[KRIM]

Huh? Ruffalo just gave an interview yesterday clearly stating he's playing the Hulk, following in the footsteps of Ferrigno.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

What are you talking about, specifically? The Avengers is coming out May 4, 2012 -- and it has a solid two weeks to itself. (Not to mention that Disney will get a full marketing blitz for their first Marvel film.) I doubt Battleship will pose a serious challenge, especially since Mi3 will crush it the week after.

Compared to TDKR and Superman, I'd say WB picked a good spot for both. The former will be the last big film of the summer, and Superman will rake in serious Christmas money like the first.

I was just asking when the Avengers was getting released, which you have answered. Thanks.

 

[Marvin]

december is the best time to release if you have a solid or hype machine film (see Avatar) but a death sentence if your film is a let down (see tron)

thing about dec is that that there is no competition during release or in the subsequent months unlike summer where you have windows and then micheael bay and then window and then will smith and so on. however summer is good because people go see movies inspite of themselves.

If superman is solid I would very much like to see it have legs.

 

[solidsnake86]

I think what some are forgetting about the winter release date besides avatar, of course, was how well sherlock holmes did and I think thats definitely why WB likes that release date. If superman can manage to be a good movie and have strong legs it will do even better than being lost in the summer which if you look at SR it had the unlucky fate of being close to pirates of the carribean.

 

[sf2]

People also forget that Superman: The Movie came out December 15, 1978 and did exceptionally well during that period.

Why are people questioning the film's Christmas 2012 slot? The LOTR trilogy, Avatar and Sherlock Holmes prove that you can have blockbuster films in the winter as well as the summer.

let's repeat the history then.

 

[mclay18]

If superman is solid I would very much like to see it have legs.

If WB markets the film properly, the Nolan involvement with Snyder directing should draw in a good amount of people opening weekend. Depending on how well audiences react, could have legs comparable to Sherlock Holmes. Hoping it'll have the word-of-mouth and weekend retention Avatar did when it opened December '09 is kidding themselves.

 

[matrix_ghost]

December can be just as crowded as the summer.
Right now there isn't much competition for Dec 2012 and if i were WB , i'd try to secure the IMAX screens for a long time in december.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

I'm ok with the December release...it's like a huge Christmas present for me!

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Also curious as to where the Wolverine sequel stands. Fox was aiming for summer 2012, but that's getting stuffed (although a few more things will move around) and they already have Ridley Scott's Prometheus, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and the fourth Ice Age on docket for then.

Billington had suggested on Twitter possibly for November/December. Which is possible. But considering where that franchise stands right now (after two generally-unpopular installments), Bond 3 and Superman would wipe the floor against old Logan.

 

[Iron_Stark]

I agree, Spidey is going to have to build the fanbase back up again after Spidey 3 left a bad taste in people's mouths plus it has a other cast so it can't even play off of people's good memories of the franchise. I expect it to gross like 210 to 225mil total if people still give a s**t about 3D by the time it comes out. I expect Star Trek 2 to gross atleast as much as the first one did. (after Iron Man 2's disappointing numbers I'm not going to be so bold anymore)Unlike Iron Man 2, if Trek 2 is just as good/better I expect 280 to 310mil for it.

I perfer a Summer release date for Superman but I can see how it could thrive during the hollidays. It's going to have to do a great deal better than Holmes did domesticially though.

lmao, It's. Still. Spider-Man.

They could have Spider-Man jump rope for two hours and he'd still kick Star Treks ass.

Didn't you also predict Iron Man 2's dvd/blu ray sales weren't going to sell squat because of the apparent bad taste that it left in people's mouth, yet it ended up breaking IM 1's sales?

Oh and get over yourself, there are about 98% of movies coming out, including this Superman reboot, that will be hoping to have IM2's "disappointing numbers"

The Avengers...I don't know...still wondering if that might move. That thing should have gotten going by now and I've read conflicting reports as to when that starts filming; some had this spring, others said fall. Now they're casting a separate actor for the angry green giant in addition to Ruffalo when that should have already been done quite a ways back.

The Avengers aren't moving for anyone.

They start filming pretty soon. Ruffalo was cast last summer in the weekend of the San Diego Comic Con, and has been in constant contact with the director and RDJ. If that's not quite a ways back, then I don't know what is.

edit, misunderstood your post, the twitter guy that said he auditioned to play the cgi Hulk, no one has confirmed it, because Ruffalo just recently at the SAG awards confirmed, again, that he will be the cgi Hulk.

 

[Dark Knight]

Plus with WB's "cornering the market" with a release date of either Wednesday Dec 19th or Friday Dec 21st, it is setting this next Superman film to have 3 straight weekends of being #1 at the Box Office during the 2012 XMas Holiday and New Years break.

This film will NOT be Superman Returns.....only way to go is up for the Superman franchise after hitting rock bottom with Returns, so to speak.

Yeah, the December Holiday release date is not just a good time to release the film....it's a freakin GREAT time to release it IMO!

 

[Excel]

um yeah.

someone-pref. show or jamie-tell me w.b. arent really planning on opening supes and hobbit in the same month.

tell me thats not the current plan.

plz.

 

[Astrodust]

I'd say if you spread the 2 films 3 weeks apart it should be fine. But they can't consider that till they see how the production of The Hobbit progresses. But moving The Hobbit to January is a mistake as well. If they are going to move The Hobbit, it has to be March or later.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I think that the Hobbit is going to be pushed to winter of 2013 and Superman will make his 2012 debut.

I disagree with the opening post in this thread though, Superman Returns did not disappoint because of Pirates. Superman Returns disappointed because the people at WB thought that people were as fond of the original Superman movie as they were Star Wars and they weren't. The series was never as beloved as Star Wars or Indy for that matter.

They didn't gage the situation accurately when it came to Superman, they should have been looking at the popular comicbook movies of the 2000's instead of some old ass movie that is more fondly remembered for Reeve's wonderful star making performance and silly plot-points than anything else. If the original Superman movies were as beloved as those afore mentioned classics the new one would have easily made 300mil, no matter how awful or mediocre it was.

I can't prove this because we are in a world where Superman Returns exists but I think that in 2006, if a modern full on reboot of Superman had come out 19 years after the last Reeve movie, it would have crushed Batman Begins gross (That movie was dealing with a recent hated flop), that it would have hit 300mil. Alas, now they have to start all over again, 200mil would ironically be a huge gross for a reboot after 7 years.

 

[KrypJonian]

^ Similarity, how great Superman is, how many comic book fans there are, and all these other things being argued aren't the issue at hand. LOTR is already an established, MAJORLY successful, and modernly known film franchise which has made unconscionable amounts of money and gathered a fan base to rival Superman's (to say the least). They ****ed up with Superman Returns because they made it a follow up to a franchise that has been dead for over 20 years. People don't know it and don't care about it... they want a modern take, a modern story, and a modern feel... SR failed to do that majorly. And lets keep in mind that it'll only be 7 yrs since SR came out when the reboot comes out. May seem like a long time but it'll still be in people's minds. Opening Superman up against The Hobbit would be an absolute suicide for the studio, plain and simple. I really think we'll be seeing Superman in 2013, probably in March 2013 to be exact.

Wow, try again...

I agree with how much money LOTR made, and how it brought the story into the public's mind, but do you honestly believe the Hobbit would be able to capture that same audience? Especially after how tired of the 3 hour fantasy movies everyone was after "Return of the King"?

Everyone knows how SR performed, and whether or not that had to do with Pirates 2 nobody really cares. It was weak.

Now WB isn't going to open two franchises at the same time to compete with themselves... There's all sorts of problems so far with the Hobbitt, but I'd gather they care more about Superman making a splash...

And according to the calendar, it will have been 6 years, stupid..

 

[KrypJonian]

I think that the Hobbit is going to be pushed to winter of 2013 and Superman will make his 2012 debut.

I disagree with the opening post in this thread though, Superman Returns did not disappoint because of Pirates. Superman Returns disappointed because the people at WB thought that people were as fond of the original Superman movie as they were Star Wars and they weren't. The series was never as beloved as Star Wars or Indy for that matter.

They didn't gage the situation accurately when it came to Superman, they should have been looking at the popular comicbook movies of the 2000's instead of some old ass movie that is more fondly remembered for Reeve's wonderful star making performance and silly plot-points than anything else. If the original Superman movies were as beloved as those afore mentioned classics the new one would have easily made 300mil, no matter how awful or mediocre it was.

I can't prove this because we are in a world where Superman Returns exists but I think that in 2006, if a modern full on reboot of Superman had come out 19 years after the last Reeve movie, it would have crushed Batman Begins gross (That movie was dealing with a recent hated flop), that it would have hit 300mil. Alas, now they have to start all over again, 200mil would ironically be a huge gross for a reboot after 7 years.

I disagree... I may be delusional, but I'm fairly certain SR would have made a sh** ton of money if Pirates hadn't have come the week after....

But to be fair, SR was not that strong, but the world would be different with a different release date...

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Superman Returns didn't even open as well as alot of people were predicting and Pirates 2 didn't come out that weekend. Superman Returns was screwed before Pirates 2 even came out so I don't know how Pirates hurt it. If anything it would have hurt Pirates.

Pirates 2 being the reason that Returns didn't put up Spider-Man numbers is a myth fanboys tell to make themselves feel better about it's far lower than expected boxoffice numbers.

 

[KrypJonian]

Superman Returns didn't even open as well as alot of people were predicting and Pirates 2 didn't come out that weekend. Superman Returns was screwed before Pirates 2 even came out so I don't know how Pirates hurt it. If anything it would have hurt Pirates.

Pirates 2 being the reason that Returns didn't put up Spider-Man numbers is a myth fanboys tell to make themselves feel better about it's far lower than expected boxoffice numbers.

SR had huge opening reciepts.... Pirates opening a week after took away from any residual BO reciepts cause it was just so damn huge....

And you are stupid to think otherwise....