Tom Welling as Superman

[AgentPat]

ARGH!!! Folks, I haven't had time to write it yet. Sorry. Life happens and all that jazz, j'know?

As soon as I get something assembled (seriously, it aint THAT impressive - just another "review" from a die hard SV fan *ahem*), I'll post a link so everybody can read it. Again, it aint that big of a deal.

You guys are funny!



Meesa now off to the Land of Zod. Nighters!

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Since Superman Returns is kind of flopping hopefully that means Warner Bros. will be a little less reluctant about letting TW don the tights for SV's finale.

I never said SR would do great at box office numbers. Do a search for proof

However it is a good film and Brandon Routh is amazing as Superman/Clark. Best choice available period

 

[The Incredible Hulk]

something tells me you'd be posting that in here even if he was on screen moaning like Frankenstein's monster, so as to somehow vindicate your delusional self......Now stop posting about "Woody" in here you've really lost any credibility you might have had left in these parts....

 

[darkzombiemutt]

lmao

 

[DogofKrypton]

I never said SR would do great at box office numbers. Do a search for proof

However it is a good film and Brandon Routh is amazing as Superman/Clark. Best choice available period

Didn't C.Lee say not to bring up SR in here anymore?

 

[triplet]

Didn't C.Lee say not to bring up SR in here anymore?

I thought C. Lee told him to not POST in here anymore....

 

[Serene]

The last few days have made this thread extremely relevant again.

SV fans got run out of the SR board because we didn't know anything about Superman, and were supporting a franchise (and actor) that did more harm then good to the character. We got pushed out, because we weren't real fans, and we didn't REALLY know how much the general public would love this new movie -- forgoing all things SV as they feel into that love.

SV has made enough money in NET profit (keep focus of the fact I’m saying net, and not gross) already to have earned itself a 200 million dollar budgeted movie (and that budget STILL wouldn't have eaten all the profits its made over the last 5 years). The fans of SV who have paid up in MANY different ways over the years deserve their movie, but barring a miracle run at the BO from SR, they'll likely never get it.

We sit here today, watching a board full of "real" Superman fans being utterly perplexed as to why their beloved character failed to live up to expectations. We sit here today watching a board full of “real” Superman fans backtrack on statements made months and months ago (about the surefire popularity of SR).

I take it all the way back to the famous MSNBC poll. 75% of the general public knew what it wanted. Many in “there” stood up and said: “no, they’ll be told what it is they want through the sheer awesomeness of this awesome movie.” I guess everyone should have been paying attention, because the general public really was trying to say something.

Quoting the whole post because I like it just that much. Nicely said, Zing.

RE: the Kane situation. Granted, it's good that he's not able to post in this forum anymore, although judging by past history, he'll just assume another one of his sock puppets to get around that. The bigger issue that I don't really understand, is why a forum would want any member who has shown himself to be such a dishonorable person.. repeatedly. His presence as a posting member brings down the entire site, and allowing him to do so reflects even worse.

Personally (although I'm sure this holds for my fellow posters here who were also involved) I find it to be a slap in the face. I would have thought that if there was a valid reason that he was allowed back, an explanation was owed to those of us who were victimized. I got nuthin'..so I'm assuming he was allowed to just slide.

I know C.Lee isn't the final word on a lot of this stuff, and I do appreciate that he tends to watch over us ugly red-headed step-children - by taking the time to actually know what's going on in here before just randomly probating people left and right. Do we sometimes push the envelope a bit? Well, sure. , but it's more defensive rather than offensive. But for the most part, the regular posters in here aren't here to cause trouble, and I think he knows that.

 

[AgentPat]

SV film, anybody? Why yes! Yes, I'd like that in a big way. Bring it on!

Break out your calculators folks. It's time to crunch the numbers again 'cause this stuff keeps getting brought up in one form or another...

In terms of general audience, most people don't want to sit in a theater for more than two hours to watch a movie. Shorter films also allow exhibitors to run more showings per day, per screen. So the goal should be a happy balance between satisfying length and daily B.O. receipt potential.

Star Trek is a TV series that became a profitable film franchise. Two of its most popular films were under two hours; The Wrath of Khan was 113 min, and The Voyage home was 119 min. A feature length SV film of approximately an hour and fifty-five minutes would be two and a half times the length of a 45 minute episode (run time without commercials.)

I believe the budget for the average SV episode is about $2.5M, but I wouldn't be surprised if they spend about $4M for season premieres and finales since those are the "event" episodes. $4M times 2.5 is $10M. Hmm. That sounds wicked low, doesn't it? Okay, double it. Make it $20M. Still too low? Well sheeit... triple it. Make it $30M. Just THINK of the kind of feature length SV "episode" we could get if they had 30 freakin' MILLION dollars to play with.

Okay, the National Association of Theatre Owners reports that the average price for a movie ticket last year (2005) was $6.41. An average of about 5 million viewers watch first run episodes of SV every week. If just *those* viewers saw the film in the first two week of release, B.O. receipts would equal the film's entire production budget plus an extra 5 million on top of that. And we're just talking average SV viewers here - not their friends and families that would join them, or any repeat business such a film might elicit from hard core fans.

This aint rocket science folks, and I SUCK at math. But there it is. That's R.O.I.! Tell me Warners hasn't crunched these numbers already. Tell me that so I can roll my eyes.

BTW: Khan made back its $11M production budget in the first w/e of release with an extra $4M to spare. It went on to do $79M domestic and $97M w/w. Voyage Home cost $25M to produce, made $110M domestically and $133M w/w.

 

[RakuMon]

Not to toot my own horn or anything, but I've been championing a Smallville movie from the very beginning. Heck, it's the reason why I joined SHH (rather than lurking) in the first place. I always thought a spin-off movie was always the way to go.

If anyone would like to search some of my very first posts back in June '04 on the Supes board, you'll see just that.

Maybe, just maybe... it might still happen.

 

[AgentPat]

Not to toot my own horn or anything, but I've been championing a Smallville movie from the very beginning. Heck, it's the reason why I joined SHH (rather than lurking) in the first place. I always thought a spin-off movie was always the way to go.

If anyone would like to search some of my very first posts back in June '04 on the Supes board, you'll see just that.

Maybe, just maybe... it might still happen.

I remember when you first came on, Raku. Those were fun times, weren't they? Back then, I was just for Welling going on to do a Superman film because I thought it would be an easier sell. Smallville brings with it a certain bias in the minds of average film goers, and Warners wanted a BLOCKBUSTER film to bring the house down. Smallville wouldn't have done that back then, and it still won't do that IMHO.

But the studio also wants to make money, which is key. The rule of thumb *used* to be that a film would have to gross twice its production budget in domestic receipts to turn a profit. This isn't quite the case anymore due to the importance of worldwide B.O., and home video. That said, a $200M budget stacks the odds against you if the goal is to turn a profit, which it IS. So, if they can keep the budget low while still producing a satisfying film, everybody can have their cake and eat it too.

Since the studio has finally made the "blockbuster" film they wanted, they can now put that goal behind them and move on with other endeavors. Maybe now we can get a SV film. It won't change what's already done and out there; they'll still have the other franchise in place with its associated ancillary profits coming in.

Anyhoo, both sides will continue to rightfully argue, SV is a completely separate franchise and should be kept as such. Don't cross the steams. Double dip 'em.

Bring on "Smallville: Birthright."

 

[Zing79]

Lately I’ve been thinking more and more that our boy may indeed get his shot. There’s a real likelihood BR’s run as Superman is over, and I find it hard to believe WB is going to let their most marketable asset just sit stale forever because SR will fail to produce the ROI they were looking for.

If you look at the decisions facing WB now (as it relates to Superman), the easiest and safest one left is to simply hand the keys to the kingdom over to SV.

I’m really going to be interested to see how this plays out at the corporate offices of WB over the next year or so.

 

[AgentPat]

...I’m really going to be interested to see how this plays out at the corporate offices of WB over the next year or so.

You always manage to say what I'm thinking, Zing.

We'll probably have a better idea on how things may play out after the summer ends, and after TPTB have had a few weeks of ratings to crunch. One thing's for sure though...

^ I don't think anybody knows who that is anymore.

 

[NHawk19]

^^ With a 58% fall off this week and now facing the fact that yes it will atleast gain back production budget. Who knows, but the next movie will have to really be something special.

 

[Kaboom]

where do you think an 800 lb gorilla would sleep pat?

 

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Lately I’ve been thinking more and more that our boy may indeed get his shot. There’s a real likelihood BR’s run as Superman is over, and I find it hard to believe WB is going to let their most marketable asset just sit stale forever because SR will fail to produce the ROI they were looking for.

If you look at the decisions facing WB now (as it relates to Superman), the easiest and safest one left is to simply hand the keys to the kingdom over to SV.

I’m really going to be interested to see how this plays out at the corporate offices of WB over the next year or so.

Hopefully they are smart enough to do that. Have seen the first hour of the movie and no diss to BR but he just doesn't do anything for me, no personality and either mimicks Chris or does his own thing and then forgets and switches the voices he uses for Clark/Superman. There's even one scene in which he plays Clark starting with a nerdy voice and then he's already talking in a deep voice like Supes...lol He just seems flat, maybe I'll change my mind. But like I always said if you don't believe in the actor he's just a guy in the suit. I think it could maybe worked out if it had been Chris himself doing this movie. He had the special ability to make it work even in a lesser film.

 

[Serene]

Lately I’ve been thinking more and more that our boy may indeed get his shot. There’s a real likelihood BR’s run as Superman is over, and I find it hard to believe WB is going to let their most marketable asset just sit stale forever because SR will fail to produce the ROI they were looking for.

If you look at the decisions facing WB now (as it relates to Superman), the easiest and safest one left is to simply hand the keys to the kingdom over to SV.

I’m really going to be interested to see how this plays out at the corporate offices of WB over the next year or so.

I'm with ya' Zing, but looking at it from a slightly different perspective, what do we think the impact of a failed Superman movie will have on SV, if any at all?

I don't know if TMTSNBN will actually be a total failure yet (although it's looking a bit sad at this point), it is selling a LOT of tickets - just not enough perhaps to make up for that insanely high budget they had. But let's say the bottom line is that it's seen as a financial disaster (ultimately), does that have any effect on people's interest in watching SV this upcoming season???

Or.. does the fact that it did sell a lot of seats help to bring potential new viewers to this show about Superman?

Discuss, and write a 5 page, double-spaced paper - font size no bigger than 10, cheaters!

 

[MJZ]

You know I'd venture to say that Batman is WB's "strongest asset" from DC, and has been for the last 20 years. The character is far more marketable and appealing to the masses.

 

[NHawk19]

You know I'd venture to say that Batman is WB's "strongest asset" from DC, and has been for the last 20 years. The character is far more marketable and appealing to the masses.

Ya know I'd venture to say there is an arguement to be had in favor of that.

Batman averaged a movie once every 3 1/2 years since 1989, has played into several of his own cartoons and has had mass appeal at several theme parks. Supes may be the most be more recognizable, but they sure havent figured out what to do with him.

 

[The Caped Knight]

You know I'd venture to say that Batman is WB's "strongest asset" from DC, and has been for the last 20 years. The character is far more marketable and appealing to the masses.

I don't doubt that one bit.

like I said before their are three Superheroes that are world wide famous

1. BATS]
- both Bats & Sups along with Wonder Woman are the core group of DCU .
2. SUPS]

3. Spidey - is the core of Marvel comics

 

[Hollywoodland]

I dont understand. You said I wasnt allowed to talk about SR at all on this board in that other thread but you guys are talking about it freely here.

Whats the rule on this?

 

[Kaboom]

I dont understand. You said I wasnt allowed to talk about SR at all on this board in that other thread but you guys are talking about it freely here.

Whats the rule on this?

the rule is that SR cannot be mentioned. The rule began bc of the flame wars which would be intentionally started.

although your right, the above conversation is probably against the rule, it doesnt seem to me like it was an intentional flame-oriented type of thing.

 

[Zing79]

I dont understand. You said I wasnt allowed to talk about SR at all on this board in that other thread but you guys are talking about it freely here.

Whats the rule on this?

Well the discussion isn't so much bout SR, as it is about the fact that SV might be the only real fall back plan WB has now.

 

[Zing79]

I'm with ya' Zing, but looking at it from a slightly different perspective, what do we think the impact of a failed Superman movie will have on SV, if any at all?

I don't know if TMTSNBN will actually be a total failure yet (although it's looking a bit sad at this point), it is selling a LOT of tickets - just not enough perhaps to make up for that insanely high budget they had. But let's say the bottom line is that it's seen as a financial disaster (ultimately), does that have any effect on people's interest in watching SV this upcoming season???

Or.. does the fact that it did sell a lot of seats help to bring potential new viewers to this show about Superman?

Discuss, and write a 5 page, double-spaced paper - font size no bigger than 10, cheaters!

There really isn’t that much to discuss, its pretty cut and dry if you ask me.

I don’t see SR having any effect on SV – it’s an established brand at this point, with a built in audience. That audience isn’t going away because of SR. It doesn’t mean it won’t erode if the show gets stale, but any erosion shouldn’t happen because of the movie.

Same goes for new fans. Any increase in viewership will most likely come from the expansion of the CW network, and not from people who went to see SR and had never seen SV.

In all honesty, if you look at the tracking data for SR it looks very much like only Superman fans are going to see the movie. POTC 2 is tracking wide; that’s what SR should have tracked like, and it’s nowhere near that.

It’s likely that Superman fans came out to see this, and few other people. That tells you:
A) Superman has a wickedly large fanbase
B) This is the same group of people that either already watch, or already hate SV

So with that in mind, nothing really changes for SV -- although it does tell you something about an SV movie and how it would do. At the bare minimum this is probably what you’d see an SV movie bring back in Box-Office receipts thanks to the Superman brand. This is also why I’m now saying SV is the easiest fall back plan for WB at this point. An SV movie wouldn’t need a 200 million budget (it could probably survive with half that). An SV movie wouldn’t need to be two and a half hours long, because it doesn’t need to establish a universe or mythos.

An SV movie would cost less, make the same, and restart the franchise without confusing Superman fans and the public into staying away from it.

 

[TKodami]

A) Superman has a wickedly large fanbase
B) This is the same group of people that either already watch, or already hate SV

Though I absolutely love & adore TMTSNBN, I am also a huge Smallville fan. I'd hoped that this new cinematic entry would help expand Smallville's fan base (more fans = larger ratings...and perhaps larger budgets? ), but you're probably right on this point. Ah well.

 

[Kaboom]

Tmtsnbn?