(01-21-2016 11:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2016 11:18 AM)TigerNK Wrote: [ -> ]I'll bet against them because they don't have a commercially successful and critically acclaimed film not directed by Chris Nolan.
Man of Steel was commercially successful. Batman, superman , and Superman 2 were all commercially successful and critically acclaimed. V for Vendetta was commercially successful and critically acclaimed. Constantine was commercially successful.
But other than Batman and Superman, DC movies are few and far between. And the Batman and Superman movies made money when they actually had money behind them and they weren't just middle fingers to the audience (Superman 4 and Batman and Robin). So batman movies make money and superman movies make money. This is a movie with Batman and Superman.
Bringing up 25-40 year old movies probably isn't the best way to try to prove a point. Let's compare their movies since 2005. I'm using the standard 2x production budget ratio compared to worldwide gross that studios use to determine a general break even point. 2x the budget usually covers all production, worldwide marketing and distribution costs when talking about big tentpole movies.
Superman Returns was well reviewed but lost money. Watchmen has a 65% RT score and lost money. Jonah Hex was a complete flop. Green Lantern was a flop. Man of Steel has a 56% RT score and made money, although everyone in Hollywood agreed that it under performed expectations. That is why they were so quick to throw Batman in the "sequel".
So my point stands. If you throw out the movies directed by Chris Nolan (a once in a generation filmmaker), their record is shoddy at best and none of the films are both universal critical and commercial successes.
(01-21-2016 01:20 PM)TigerNK Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2016 11:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2016 11:18 AM)TigerNK Wrote: [ -> ]I'll bet against them because they don't have a commercially successful and critically acclaimed film not directed by Chris Nolan.
Man of Steel was commercially successful. Batman, superman , and Superman 2 were all commercially successful and critically acclaimed. V for Vendetta was commercially successful and critically acclaimed. Constantine was commercially successful.
But other than Batman and Superman, DC movies are few and far between. And the Batman and Superman movies made money when they actually had money behind them and they weren't just middle fingers to the audience (Superman 4 and Batman and Robin). So batman movies make money and superman movies make money. This is a movie with Batman and Superman.
Bringing up 25-40 year old movies probably isn't the best way to try to prove a point. Let's compare their movies since 2005. I'm using the standard 2x production budget ratio compared to worldwide gross that studios use to determine a general break even point. 2x the budget usually covers all production, worldwide marketing and distribution costs when talking about big tentpole movies.
Superman Returns was well reviewed but lost money. Watchmen has a 65% RT score and lost money. Jonah Hex was a complete flop. Green Lantern was a flop. Man of Steel has a 56% RT score and made money, although everyone in Hollywood agreed that it under performed expectations. That is why they were so quick to throw Batman in the "sequel".
So my point stands. If you throw out the movies directed by Chris Nolan (a once in a generation filmmaker), their record is shoddy at best and none of the films are both universal critical and commercial successes.
Their record of a few movies in the last fifteen years. And if you exclude movies with Iron Man, none of the Marvel movies grossed a billion. See how easy it is to exclude the cream of the crop; especially when they are 30% of the output?
Excluding movies with Iron Man, Marvel has massive worldwide box office hits and critical darlings in Guardians of the Galaxy, Winter Soldier and Ant Man (grossed 4 times it's budget). Meanwhile Thor 2 was better reviewed and nearly made as much money as a Superman reboot. Let that sink in.
You aren't good at proving points.
(01-21-2016 01:56 PM)TigerNK Wrote: [ -> ]Excluding movies with Iron Man, Marvel has massive worldwide box office hits and critical darlings in Guardians of the Galaxy, Winter Soldier and Ant Man (grossed 4 times it's budget). Meanwhile Thor 2 was better reviewed and nearly made as much money as a Superman reboot. Let that sink in.
You aren't good at proving points.
The point is you want to exclude the Nolan films as if they aren't products of Warner and DC. Warner took a shot on Nolan who had noteworthy, but non-blockbusters on his résumé and he ran with it. Snyder is doing B v. s, and two Justice League movies, but WB has four or five other DC films on the docket by good filmmakers. And that's not factoring the Batman movie expected from Affleck.
Thor 2, Iron Man 2, and Incredible Hulk (which I loved) are not thought of as quality movies so it's not like Marvel has a spotless record. Avengers 2 underwhelmed.
I love this genre and I go see them all, so I want them all to be great.
(01-21-2016 08:04 AM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 09:38 PM)MemphisFan95 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 12:11 PM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 10:06 AM)salukiblue Wrote: [ -> ]I'm fired up for Batman/Superman, but that's just me.
Harder part is that most people don't understand the whole "vs." thing and some mainstream people might be turned off by the idea that the are in conflict with one another.
Sorta like "Civil War" but at least there have been enough (understatement) Cappy, Avengers, Iron Man movies so folks will want to see what the deal is.
Me too.
I think some people think they have to take sides between DC and Marvel.
Batman v. superman will open with at least $130 million and if it's good, it'll gross $400 million in the US.
If batman V superman only makes 400 million domestic execs at warner brothers will slit their wrists
The Dark Knight made $530 million. Man of Steel did $290 million.
Anything over $300 million domestic will be okay.
The only comic book movies to do over $400 million domestic are the two avengers movies,spider-man, iron Man 3, the Dark Knight and the Dark Knight rises.
Comic Adaptations Domestic Gross
I think Warner wants the movie to be well-loved. Batman Begins grossed about the same amount as Superman Returns. Batman Begins led to the Dark Knight; Superman Returns had its sequel cancelled.
If B v. S does $275 million domestic and $600 million worldwide but it is loved and well-reviewed, it will position Justice League to be a $1 billion grosser as the excitement builds. Warner isn't just banking on ticket sales because they'll make hundreds of millions on merchandise and sponsorships. The top Halloween costumes for women this year will probably be the movie versions of Wonder Woman and Harley Quinn (with a slutty Rey up there too).
If B v. S is as good as the buzz has been saying, it will dominate the box office for six weeks. The same weekend last year had Home, Get Hard, and Insurgent made $107 million collectively. B v. s will have a couple leftover hits and My Big Fat Wedding 2 competing with it. I wouldn't be shocked if it did over $200 million in the first weekend. It'll probably be more like $150 million. Even with the 2nd season of Daredevil being released that weekend.
If it makes 875 million it's not going to break even WB will have to change its plan the only reason Justice League would do a billion was because of BM SM and WW all in this movie. It's going to cost the same as Star Wars by the time marketing is over and Disney said they had to do 1.5 billion to be successful.
(01-21-2016 04:58 PM)MemphisFan95 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2016 08:04 AM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 09:38 PM)MemphisFan95 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 12:11 PM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 10:06 AM)salukiblue Wrote: [ -> ]I'm fired up for Batman/Superman, but that's just me.
Harder part is that most people don't understand the whole "vs." thing and some mainstream people might be turned off by the idea that the are in conflict with one another.
Sorta like "Civil War" but at least there have been enough (understatement) Cappy, Avengers, Iron Man movies so folks will want to see what the deal is.
Me too.
I think some people think they have to take sides between DC and Marvel.
Batman v. superman will open with at least $130 million and if it's good, it'll gross $400 million in the US.
If batman V superman only makes 400 million domestic execs at warner brothers will slit their wrists
The Dark Knight made $530 million. Man of Steel did $290 million.
Anything over $300 million domestic will be okay.
The only comic book movies to do over $400 million domestic are the two avengers movies,spider-man, iron Man 3, the Dark Knight and the Dark Knight rises.
Comic Adaptations Domestic Gross
I think Warner wants the movie to be well-loved. Batman Begins grossed about the same amount as Superman Returns. Batman Begins led to the Dark Knight; Superman Returns had its sequel cancelled.
If B v. S does $275 million domestic and $600 million worldwide but it is loved and well-reviewed, it will position Justice League to be a $1 billion grosser as the excitement builds. Warner isn't just banking on ticket sales because they'll make hundreds of millions on merchandise and sponsorships. The top Halloween costumes for women this year will probably be the movie versions of Wonder Woman and Harley Quinn (with a slutty Rey up there too).
If B v. S is as good as the buzz has been saying, it will dominate the box office for six weeks. The same weekend last year had Home, Get Hard, and Insurgent made $107 million collectively. B v. s will have a couple leftover hits and My Big Fat Wedding 2 competing with it. I wouldn't be shocked if it did over $200 million in the first weekend. It'll probably be more like $150 million. Even with the 2nd season of Daredevil being released that weekend.
If it makes 875 million it's not going to break even WB will have to change its plan the only reason Justice League would do a billion was because of BM SM and WW all in this movie. It's going to cost the same as Star Wars by the time marketing is over and Disney said they had to do 1.5 billion to be successful.
That's what they want you to think. Even if B v. S. grossed what Man of Steel did $670 million, I guarantee the movie actually makes money. WB says the Harry Potter movies lost money. That's Hollywood Accounting. If B v S costs $300 million, $100-150 million of that is going to be covered from product placement and marketing deals. Time Warner will gross hundreds of millions from toys, clothes, and other merch. Plus they probably filmed where they got tax rebates. They'll spend $200 million on marketing. So when everything is factored, Warner is fine if they tread water.
But it wouldn't be a good look. If they movie isn't good (and I don't mean opinions are mixed like MoS), then it'll flame out after $200 million domestic and probably $500 million worldwide.
Marvel vs DC arguments are just silly. I want them all and want them to be great.
(01-21-2016 05:27 PM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2016 04:58 PM)MemphisFan95 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-21-2016 08:04 AM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 09:38 PM)MemphisFan95 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 12:11 PM)Latilleon Wrote: [ -> ]Me too.
I think some people think they have to take sides between DC and Marvel.
Batman v. superman will open with at least $130 million and if it's good, it'll gross $400 million in the US.
If batman V superman only makes 400 million domestic execs at warner brothers will slit their wrists
The Dark Knight made $530 million. Man of Steel did $290 million.
Anything over $300 million domestic will be okay.
The only comic book movies to do over $400 million domestic are the two avengers movies,spider-man, iron Man 3, the Dark Knight and the Dark Knight rises.
Comic Adaptations Domestic Gross
I think Warner wants the movie to be well-loved. Batman Begins grossed about the same amount as Superman Returns. Batman Begins led to the Dark Knight; Superman Returns had its sequel cancelled.
If B v. S does $275 million domestic and $600 million worldwide but it is loved and well-reviewed, it will position Justice League to be a $1 billion grosser as the excitement builds. Warner isn't just banking on ticket sales because they'll make hundreds of millions on merchandise and sponsorships. The top Halloween costumes for women this year will probably be the movie versions of Wonder Woman and Harley Quinn (with a slutty Rey up there too).
If B v. S is as good as the buzz has been saying, it will dominate the box office for six weeks. The same weekend last year had Home, Get Hard, and Insurgent made $107 million collectively. B v. s will have a couple leftover hits and My Big Fat Wedding 2 competing with it. I wouldn't be shocked if it did over $200 million in the first weekend. It'll probably be more like $150 million. Even with the 2nd season of Daredevil being released that weekend.
If it makes 875 million it's not going to break even WB will have to change its plan the only reason Justice League would do a billion was because of BM SM and WW all in this movie. It's going to cost the same as Star Wars by the time marketing is over and Disney said they had to do 1.5 billion to be successful.
That's what they want you to think. Even if B v. S. grossed what Man of Steel did $670 million, I guarantee the movie actually makes money. WB says the Harry Potter movies lost money. That's Hollywood Accounting. If B v S costs $300 million, $100-150 million of that is going to be covered from product placement and marketing deals. Time Warner will gross hundreds of millions from toys, clothes, and other merch. Plus they probably filmed where they got tax rebates. They'll spend $200 million on marketing. So when everything is factored, Warner is fine if they tread water.
But it wouldn't be a good look. If they movie isn't good (and I don't mean opinions are mixed like MoS), then it'll flame out after $200 million domestic and probably $500 million worldwide.
http://screenrant.com/batman-v-superman-...ce-league/
Wouldn't come close to breaking even