Superman Returns why WB is so confident this time?

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

WAKE UP!
There's only one reason Hollywood makes movies anymore, $.
What would happen if they admitted this? Would it not hurt ticket sales? So don't expect Hollywood to admit it anytime soon.

Excuse me?

did you actully read what i typed?




I basicly said that.

 

[dark_b]

yes they are making the movies because of money. everyyear they are making 100 of movies. some of them are good some of them are not. so what? if they wouldnt make movies for money they would never had money for a 250 mil budget.

i come on this boards because of ther pics and some info. but i will not cry if this movie is gona suck.

1. its just a movie.
2. get a life.

 

[Kryptonite X]

WAKE UP!
There's only one reason Hollywood makes movies anymore, $.
What would happen if they admitted this? Would it not hurt ticket sales? So don't expect Hollywood to admit it anytime soon.

Yes they want to make money, but they only can make money if they make a movie people want to watch.
Studios are in the game to make money. This is not a fan film and the fans are not even 5% of the people that write the studio's paychecks, and even if they for some reason disides to make a film for the fans, they never would be able to satisfy all the *****ing fanboys. (and they know that)

What are you complaining about?

 

[sf2]

the more i think about it, the more i think singer is incredibly superb.
MCG wanted $200mil and Ratner wanted an unknown got kicked right away, but singer just got everything he wants.

 

[dark_b]

the more i think about it, the more i think singer is incredibly superb.
MCG wanted $200mil and Ratner wanted an unknown got kicked right away, but singer just got everything he wants.

how do you know that singer wanted 200 mil of more ????????
how do you know that? what if singer just wanted to make a movie about superman with less money and WB gave him more money because they saw that singer is making the right thing?

 

[Kryptonite X]

^^

I fail to see your point?

 

[dark_b]

^^

I fail to see your point?

my point?

 

[Super Kal]

I'm thinking the onely reason The WB are going with Singer is because he did so well with the XMen movies, and they feel that he can do just as well with DC's flagship character

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I personally think thats how they shouldn't think about it...money..

It should be for the love of the craft and wanting to make a good movie..Thats why hollywood has lost it's way..money...

Hollywood has always been a business. It's there for money.

 

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

Very true and of cause i agree..but what does that have to do with us as long as we want to see the movie.your going to pay anyway..I'm not really interested in how much money it makes just that i enjoy the movie.

 

[SuperFerret]

Not to be a troll, and my own personal feelings on the movie aside, the first post states explicitly that WB had full confidence in each and every other Superman 5 pitch up until the point when it failed, so it goes to show that they'd have confidence in Singer's movie, although in contrast to the previous pitches this one looks like it will definitely hit theatres.

 

[Nightwing1977]

Not to be a troll, and my own personal feelings on the movie aside, the first post states explicitly that WB had full confidence in each and every other Superman 5 pitch up until the point when it failed, so it goes to show that they'd have confidence in Singer's movie, although in contrast to the previous pitches this one looks like it will definitely hit theatres.

And it will be better than what Burton, Ratner, McG, & other try to do. Singer is known for using story more than action, which is why X-Men movies were fantastic. And so what about the money. How come no one said the same thing about Batman Begins? It always about money when it come to movies. Even Oscar type. People has to make a living somehow, you know.

 

[Alonsovich]

People has to make a living somehow, you know.

I wish that I made 1/10 of what a Hollywood studio hack makes... that's not making a living... that's making a fortune.

 

[Morg]

Superman Lives was about this close to get into production but got chopped away. Superman Flyby by JJ Abram was praised marvelously by WB but trashcan is it's destination. Superman vs Batman, WB and Peterson are so in love with it and having all the casting in mind, but it still didn't materialised.

finally...

SUPERMAN RETURNS!!!

why is WB so confident this time and invest in an amount of $250mil into it, making it as one of the most expensive movies in the filming history?

you can sing all you want to now...

WB saw my order of Superman stuff I placed I guess

 

[Outsiderzedge]

WB saw my order of Superman stuff I placed I guess

You're less than 9k away from having the most posts.

Want my posts? I could ask Dew or someone to add them to you.

 

[MatchesMalone]

WAKE UP!
There's only one reason Hollywood makes movies anymore, $.
What would happen if they admitted this? Would it not hurt ticket sales? So don't expect Hollywood to admit it anytime soon.

Oldguy, please, tell me the time when "Hollywood" (as in studios and distribution companies) were concerned about something OTHER than making money. I would love to know about this supposed "Hollywood". Was it in the 30's? the 20's? the 10's? When?

 

[Morg]

You're less than 9k away from having the most posts.

Want my posts? I could ask Dew or someone to add them to you.

what's the catch? I'm not giving any of my Superman collection to you

 

[rdh007]

Why is WB confident?

 

[Dr. Fate]

Because they have Mr X2 behind it and they know he has a fanbase from it. I think that's the major reason.

Yeah more than likely, even though he still went and cast two MTV level actors to play the leads.

For all we know though it may turn out to be his 1941.

 

[JamalYIgle]

WAKE UP!
There's only one reason Hollywood makes movies anymore, $.
What would happen if they admitted this? Would it not hurt ticket sales? So don't expect Hollywood to admit it anytime soon.

ANYMORE?
Money is the only reason movies are ever made. Any one who tells you otherwise is deluded or lying. And before you start about Indy films every indy filmaker I've ever met would kill to have a major distributor handle their filem to what... say it with me class... MAKE A SHIATE LOAD OF CASH.

 

[Oldguy]

ANYMORE?
Money is the only reason movies are ever made. Any one who tells you otherwise is deluded or lying. And before you start about Indy films every indy filmaker I've ever met would kill to have a major distributor handle their filem to what... say it with me class... MAKE A SHIATE LOAD OF CASH.

Money wasn't the be all end all, like it is today until the corporations took over in the 70's. Now filmaking is a largely stangnant cesspool of remakes and sequels.

 

[Backdrifter]

I personally think thats how they shouldn't think about it...money..

It should be for the love of the craft and wanting to make a good movie..Thats why hollywood has lost it's way..money..

this movie has confidence because the Wb have something that we do not they have dailys..(footage from the day) they have oscar winner Kevin spacey, they have a great director and no doubt they must like what Brandon is doing.And the fact BB was the best movie of last year..well make your own conclusions.

The best movie of last year? BB came out THIS year...and FYI, it was NOT the best movie of the year...not at all. BB was deeply flawed, and I can name about 10 movies that came out this year that were better.

 

[JamalYIgle]

Money wasn't the be all end all, like it is today until the corporations took over in the 70's. Now filmaking is a largely stangnant cesspool of remakes and sequels.

Right, Jack Warner, Jonh D. Rockefeller and Sam Goldwyn all owned movies studios, but of course they didn't do it to make money, they did it for the art.
you should really take a look at some books on Hollywood during the 30's and 40's and rethink you're statement. i'll even give you a primer:
The films of the thirties by Jerry Vermilye (Citadel Press)

 

[Oldguy]

Excuse me?

did you actully read what i typed?




I basicly said that.

LOL, my bad. I thought you meant you didn't think SR was going to fall into that trap as well.

 

[Oldguy]

Right, Jack Warner, Jonh D. Rockefeller and Sam Goldwyn all owned movies studios, but of course they didn't do it to make money, they did it for the art.
you should really take a look at some books on Hollywood during the 30's and 40's and rethink you're statement. i'll even give you a primer:
The films of the thirties by Jerry Vermilye (Citadel Press)

What part of Money wasn't the be all end all, don't you understand? I thought artists are supposed to be observant? Why don't you try actually observing what I type, instead of spinning my statements into your limited black and white view?