Superman Returns made basically as much money in the USA as TASM 2 did despite 8 years of inflation, 3D, tickets, Pirates of the Caribbean 2 and being a shitty, impossible to market film.

You say with a straight face that Spiderman is not less relevant than Superman yet say it is my personal opinion solely supporting my argument? Is this a joke?

Shut the fuck up.

My first post says that everything should be targeted for superhero fatigue. Its not like we didn't see any DC superheroe movies in the past decade.

Also the fatigue factor and the relevance of Spiderman/Superman have like 0% connection.

Excel's "jokes" are really getting out of his hand.

Your feelings are you analysis? Where in this post have you presented an argument that is resembling analysis.

If Superman is not that popular, can somebody explain why MoS has been so big on home video sales? the film literally sold a lot more bluray/dvds than Iron Man 3, X-Men Days of Future Past, Thor, The Amazing Spiderman, The Amazing Spiderman 2, Thor 2, Captan America, The Wolverine, Captain America The Winter Soldier, etc.

If these sales are not a proof of popularity, can somebody explain how it can be measured? (popularity can't be meassured by internet haters )

Of course people care about the character!!!!! stop assuming shits, real facts are what matters

The only one of those that is beloved by anyone is CA2 which sold a lot less tix than MOS.

Beloved by anyone?

I guess you are basing that analysis by MoS and CATWS shitty RT scores, aren't you?

Kids these days are funny and act like sheep

Man of Steel sold a lot more tix than any of those except IM3, which was possibly worse received among audiences.

IDK about this post but plenty of places in this thread...

No, the point is pretty simple. BVS and the other DC movies focusing on being their own unique film causes the film to largely avoid the generic look for Marvel fare. Is what it is.

So The Avengers, Captain America: The Winder Soldier, and Guardians of the Galaxy look the same?

Now granted, I haven't seen Man of Steel in two years, but Batman v Superman looks very similar visually to how I remember that film looking.

Look is in regards to overall tone and vibe of the film.

Sure, but those films I cited are very different tonally as well.

...Not really.

There is nothing intellectually challenging or ambitious from any of them. CA2 is the most thematically "ambitious" (if you could even call it that) of any Marvel film, and it still pales in comparison to the DC fare, Green Lantern aside.

I think - most - audience members are looking to be mentally challenged on at least some sort of level. The super pop tarty stuff gets old pretty quickly.

Man of steel mirrors nolans style so much it's like WB execs told snyder "just do what he did."

I think we want to be challenged, but most audiences just want to be entertained and removed from their world for a couple hours.

No, history generally reflects that the majority of audiences enjoy smart films generally. Obviously there is the occasional no brain popcorn blockbuster, but smart popcorn is always preferable.

We value the 'challenge' more than most audiences, but the demand from that market is still there and very strong. If a silly popcorny "blockbuster" was opening vs. a smart "blockbuster" and advertising was equal, the smart blockbuster would win every time. The mental challenge adds something to the movie going escapism experience that pure popcorn simply cannot replicate.

Good is Marvel's top enemy of great, and in time - aka right now - it was always going to be their unraveling after every movie looked and seemed the same. WB's decision to primarily focus on one film at a time and making the best possible film (generally successful even if MOS had room to improve) was always the more mature and wiser approach. While Marvel obviously beat them to the punch, it remains to be seen how it will play out for Marvel. It certainly didn't well for WB when they went that route in the late 1990s.

It's not rocket science. Some folks just get it. Nolan gets it. Bryan Singer largely gets it. I think Snyder gets it too but his script for MOS had issues he couldn't overcome. I don't think anybody with influence at Marvel gets it, and it is to the point where that type of serious drama would feel totally out of place in a Marvel film, and they risk alienating what has become their primary fanbase. Marvel quite simply cannot have a "Joker kills Rachel" type of moment which really gets the audience glued to the story. It can't do it. The studio didn't take the movies serious enough, and as a result, theyre fading pretty quickly.

You're literally talking as if Iron Man, the avengers, guardians and cap 2 don't exist. You can't deny audiences didn't love those.
There is also such thing as a movie that thinks it's smart and intelligent, like MOS, but isn't.e

Of course they exist. One of the issues with being generic is you're not memorable, i.e. nobody really remembers the first Iron Man movie. They might if the sequels weren't all borderline clones of the original, or if the character ever went through any sort of growth or change at all, but neither of those two have occurred and as a result, it all just kind of blends together.

Avengers was huge but as evidenced by the sequels opening, not quite as iconic as folks initially thought. Guardians....yeah we won't go there. Guardians was absolutely awful and while it connected with kids and families, it didn't help Marvel with it's core demographic. If it had, it would have been visible with AOU. Cap 2 was pretty good and to date is the only impressive sequel Marvels made.

Frankly, AOU's under performance should shed some light of where Marvel REALLY stands. Cap 2 was this "huge hit" but it did 95/252. Solid numbers but hardly enormous. MOS routed that movie and then some even with huge competition.

What do you think it says about Captain America compared to Superman when CA, fresh off the mega hit THE AVENGERS and given a very well received movie can "only" manage a 95/254 stat line while MAN OF STEEL, with a reception & enormous competition, manages 116/291?

MOS clearly had more working against it while CA2 had many things going for it and yet MOS still straight up destroyed. What does that tell you about the level each character is on with the general public? Don't you think you're both overrating Captain America and underrating Superman a little bit? What do you think is going to happen when BVS gets a much better reception than MOS and has a much better release date while opening way higher?

You're not speaking in fully developed thoughts. Audiences loved the first two Tobey McGuire Spider-mans, right? The Marvel films all feel the same because the pretty much are all the same - they're not only part of the same huge collective story, but the structure, plot devices, and general tone of all the films is absurdly similar. They have been on the fast track to franchise fatigue for a while now regardless of how much people loved the first few films.

So it has nothing to do with whether or not those other films exist. The only purpose the popularity of those films serves at this point in time is as the reason we got a bunch of sequels which essentially copy catted the originals.



What does this even mean? Man of Steel took itself seriously and some of it's themes were too vague for audience members to universally pick up? They should have borrowed some of the TDK trilogy playbook calls and directly spelled the lessons out for the audience? Maybe. But that will beat not trying at all (aka Marvel) every day of the week.

It's sad that it's obvious there is a GREAT movie w/ the cast & crew hidden in the MOS final product. Goyer's story was excellent but the actual script was lacking.

Wait a good gross for a mediocre movie such as IM3 and AoU making more than MoS are not proof enough that audience love Marvel movies equally? I don't think DCU characters other than Batman are move beloved than Marvel characters. Also a new Batman will surely result in some admissions decrease specially coming after TDKR and not TDK. Plus you have to remember when Batman broke the records other superheroes were not that prevalent in the market so its not that he is dominating the market like previously. The ensemble has been done better before DCU and fans will surely overlap. Also Avengers wasn't exactly a dumb movie just not overtly smart.

You're fucking ridiculous.

Marvel has made 4 greatly received films to date, you cannot fucking deny it. People loved the fuck out of Guardians of the Galaxy, you can't let your own bias against it say that it wasn't enjoyed by most who saw it.

I'm not a Marvel fan, the only MCU films I even like are Cap 2 and GOTG, but I really can't
stand your unjust trashing of them. The Incredible Hulk was disposable. Iron Man 2 was considered pretty lame by most. Thor and the first Captain America were fun, but forgettable. Iron Man 3 pissed off the fanboys. Thor 2 was generic as fuck. But those four aforementioned films are widely beloved by the general audience.

AOU is not doing less business because The Avengers isn't beloved, its because the reviews weren't as good, and it didn't present anything too new. The new DC universe has the Nolan batman trilogy. On average they hit the same amount of home runs.

You're saying the Marvel films are all the same (light, fun), but the DC universe isn't. But are not the Dark Knight trilogy and MOS both dark takes on the material? I'm not saying they didn't try with MOS, but saying that they try harder is ridiculous and there is nothing you can say to back up that statement.

Maybe BvS will be Zach Snyder's best film to date, maybe it will get great reviews, have great legs and a great opening, and be able to turn its appealing premise into something more. But I'd say the odds are against it considering Snyders filmography.

I'm also not saying that Marvel succeeds every time either. Ant-Man will likely be their lowest grossing film in 4 years or more, and the aforementioned films all had their issues. Civil War may not out gross IM3. But saying that the DCU films are in any way superior to the Marvel films because "they make you think" is ridiculous when the only films that have done so belong to the same superhero, the same director, and the same trilogy which is over and not coming back.

MOS is not above the average Marvel film, nor does it really "make you think." Maybe BvS will show the DCU can have good movies minus Nolan, but until that happens, they are not superior.

Lets see how GOTG2 does.


You can't tell the difference between being loved like TDK or Pirates 1 or Transformers 1 and then being "loved" like Iron Man 1 or Star Trek 1. Totally different levels of enthusiasm even if both received positive reactions.



Bats and Supes - but especially Bats- have much higher floors than any Marvel character.



"Dark" isn't the right word as much as serious is. They are both serious, they are both ambitious, the treat the story theyre trying to tell and the characters theyre trying to bring to life with great respect. There is no winking at the camera.



It isn't ridiculous at all. Folks enjoy that style of film making MORE. Very simple.

MOS is not above the average Marvel film, nor does it really "make you think." Maybe BvS will show the DCU can have good movies minus Nolan, but until that happens, they are not superior.[/quote]

And the only successful films they have made like that is the Nolan bat trilogy.

How can you say audiences loved CA2 and Iron Man 1 but not MOS when MOS sold or in normal circumstances would have sold more tickets>?

He doesn't know what he writes or says

Because they had better legs and better audience scores. They both have audience scores on RT over 90, and significantly better IMDB scores. And critical reviews are obviously far better as well. And you may blame its bad legs on the 150 million worth of openers week 2, but would it really have held that much better? Maybe it could have gotten a 2.7X multiplier, still unimpressive w/ summer weekdays. Cap 2 got a 2.7 in April when weekdays are weak as anything.