wow i jut spent 10 minutes editing it cause my question mark key locked. wow.

LOL. Dude, my whole point is that they don't need to rely upon Superman to keep them in the summer market for upcoming years. They've got plenty of other films, directors, and possible franchises to plug away with. Sure, they would've loved it if SR hit it huge -- that's why they spent so much. But they're not going to go above-and-beyond the call of duty for a film that's underperformed. Do you seriously think that SUPERMAN is their only hope for future summers?

This thread is getting funny.

There are two more Harry Potter movies, which will make $1 billion apiece worldwide, while costing only $300m to produce both. That adds up to about 5 Supermans right there for about 1.2x the cost. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: No tentpoles? Hah!

Pirates 2 has been doing that, but that was expected.



Did Batman?




Poseidon tanked. Superman hasn't. Superman will make most of it's money up with the worldwide total and DVD. It may take a couple of years for Poseidon.



Batman Begins went up against the box office giants The Perfect Man, Bewitched, Herbie: Fully Loaded, George A. Romero's Land of the Dead. It then faced War of the Worlds in it's second and a half week. War of the Worlds granted was pretty good competition, but nowhere near Pirates. Pirates is on pace to make $150 million more than WotW did. The fact that Superman is at the $147, ($150 rounded up by tomorrow) mark is somewhat decent. Not great, but decent. However, Superman has been released for two weeks exactly. If it's released for the same amount of days as Batman Begins, it has 128 days (If it matches Batman exactly) to get to the $205 mark. So add or shave 10 days off from that total.

That's $55 million. It'll get somewhere between $11-14 this weekend. $7-9 next weekend, $4 the next, and then will chug along as the theaters decrease. Now throw in the weekdays. It's going to make about $10 for the week. You figure 2.6 for Wednesday and 2.55 for Thursday. Next week it'll make $3-$7 and so on. I'd say it has a decent chance of reaching that mark.

Did Batman?


So, in other words, it's all PIRATES' fault?



It certainly has a chance... just that it's getting less likely with each passing day of underperformance. I do agree, though, that at this point the chance is still decent.

Let's put it another way -- PRADA is about to pass SUPERMAN on weekdays. It will likely outperform SUPERMAN for the rest of the box-office run. How much more do you think PRADA will make?

Poseidon will make back its money with DVD too. Its $100m+ gross overseas is fairly impressive, especially given its domestic performance.

Edit: Pirates cannot be blamed for the failure, especially since (as Telemachos mentions) Prada is about to pass Superman in dailies. One movie is much more well-received than the other.

And Superman won't have a decent foreign total?


None of that excuses a $52m opening weekend, in which Superman opened up against weak competition. Pirates can explain a large drop, but it can't explain where it drops from.[/quote]

Why was Superman supposed to have a gigantic weekend again?

Simply on the name Superman? Or because the last popular Superman film was in 1980, which has to be fresh in everyone's mind.

So what excused Batman's weak opening last year? I mean they had an entire movie series in the 90's.

As for Pirates, it isn't even a part of the discussion, I just brought it up in the competition factor. Who cares if Pirates drops or not? It's a sequel and it was and is going to be huge, everyone knew that going in. It wasn't the same thing with Superman.

Superman Returns suffers from super extreme boringness.

No more or less decent than Poseidon. You suggested that Poseidon is doing far worse, when that is not the case.

Why? Because with its budget, it needs one, and one doesn't have to be an accountant to see why. No excuse can pardon a lousy count when the beans are counted, which is what truly matters.

The fact that Batman's budget wasn't larger than Roseanne's rear end meant its opening wasn't "weak."

You really think that it's only going to match $102 million in it's foreign gross? As for the last part you're right. It's right now $1 million above the production cost with it's worldwide total. Not great, but in the green. (That's not sarcasm)



The budget of $204 million? It should come close to that with it's final total domestically. As for marketing, the foreign gross, and DVD sales should make that up.



If Batman didn't have good wom, they would've been fucked, even with a $155 million budget.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/show ... p?t=495413

I see the Superman Returns Fanboys over at RT are taking this interview pretty hard and pretty defensive to.. Makes me wonder if this situation were turned around and SR was the movie that made 130 Million in 1 weekend and POTC 2 performed like SR is right now and that question were asked to Bruckheimer, if they'd be laughing about it to like we are, or I AM with Singer???

It's almost exactly the same as here, just more balanced.

You bring up a good point though. What if one of the most highly anticipated sequels of the last twenty years only opened to $52 million at the box office? Bruckheimer would probably punch the interviewer out if that happened.

Yes, since it will take nearly $200m to match Poseidon's $102m.

Stop using wishful thinking. The official budget is $260m, including early production costs, but without including marketing costs of $40m. Wasted money has to be counted somewhere or another. The extra $96m would require an extra $200m BO take or the equivalent in DVD to recoup.

A lot less fucked. There are relative levels of getting fucked.

The bottom line is, it is embarrassing for such a huge film to wait until somewhere between DVD and HBO before it might turn a profit.

In Yen?





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_Returns

Maybe with marketing it's $260?



Poseidon'ish fucked.

Are you Japanese? Of course not. Poseidon had 60% the budget. There is a reason why Blair Witch making $140m is a success, and Superman doing the same is a failure. Relativity.

The director quoting figures after his movie underperforms! And Iran denies producing weapons. Denial is by nature the least trustworthy of human actions. Besides, you use Wikipedia of all the iffy sources you could have picked, where fanboys can edit all they want! How about a more unbiased source:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=superman06.htm

Did I say it's not fucked? Besides, we were talking about Batman. Stop sidestepping the topic.

Bruckheimer doesn't make movies. I doubt Verbinski would punch anybody - he might just stutter like Singer, which is a fair guess.

I'm off to do some work. Sleep on the futility of your cause: a good man's talents shouldn't be spent arguing for a loser of a film.

No, I was just kidding.



Yeah, I guess you're right. If he is quoting incorrect figures though, why say $204? Wouldn't he go much lower? Same with the beginning of that passage in terms of fans editing it. Why even bring up the $260 number and just go much lower?

The truth is though, we'll never know the offical budget. I've heard from $185-$285. With marketing that makes it $285-$385

I'll go with the $260 though (Which makes a $210 production budget with the $50 million spent between 1990-2004. So $360 total), which is why I think there is going to be a sequel. The WB would never spend that much money if they weren't building a franchise around the character. For the next one, the budget is slashed to $180, and with more action, the film should make more money.



Once again I was just kidding. I was just annoying you with Poseidon again.

this site is full of pirates fanboys who wanted it to crush superman so obvi they will maske it seem worse then it is. common sense itll obvi get 200 million cause its at 150 by tomorrow n will be in theaters 3 more months. but they chose to ignore it n assume superman will *somehow* stop at 180-190.....shack said itll top like 180 million and end there... so itll onlymake 20 million tops after this weekend?!?total?!?! ok. maybe if gets another 58% drop, but whats the lilely hood of that when most movie this summerthat a big movies opening in their second weekend thus inflating 2nd weekend rop-da vinci, cars, nacho, click-all had a "boucneback " in their 3rd weekend and then 3rd weekdays? superman is probably gonna have that to. 162-164 million after this weekend and 177-180 the weekend afterthat,well ahead of batmans pace.

I think Kate Bosworth was taunting WOKJ forum participants with her response:

"Yeah, all the time - it's like the only thing we talk about. Come home every day, come home from work, talk about the box office - Ha."

What's the combined gross of all of Kate's films put together? I wouldn't be looking at the box office either if I were her.

I'm not a Pirates fanboy, in fact, I admire Singer a great deal. But that was just funny.

UGhh, what money did it loose, its still gonna make a profit of over 400 million for the studio. Theres a difference between being a fanboy by looking at one set of numbers, but being that your 30, Im suprised you dont have a more reasonable business sense. It will almost turn a profit from it theatrical run with over 400 million. A sequel is most likely a definite.

Where exactly are you getting this 400 million profit figure from? I'm not following...

Ok
the movie cost around 250 million
Marketing is often covered by backend deals, having monster ties with BK, Pepsi, and different Car manufacturers.

The film is going to make around 190-200 Domestic, another 150-250 overseas For a 340-450 total WW.

From current statistics, a movie studio gets to keep rough 55% of what it makes in theaters. So that would mean that Warner bros from will get anywhere from 187 to 245 million back from Superman's theatrical run. Recent superhero films that do well have been doing well on DVD many times matching what they have earned in theaters, and in some cases much more. I have a feeling that Superman will be a good earner on DVD, but even so, I will be conservative and put that it only makes 300 million WW. From what I've read, the studios make more than 80% of the profits on DVD, and sometimes more. For a film like studio, and being that not many individuals are getting % deals, 85-90% seems likely will go to Warner Bros.

So that would mean that Superman will earn Warner Bros an additional 240 million, and thats being safe. So as of now. Superman will be making on the low end 430 million dollars on their 250 million film.

Another area that has been tapped in very well is merchandising, clothes, and Halloween Costumes, It is rumored that last year ROTS generated more than 1.5 billion dollars in merchandising alone. Star Wars Superman is definitely not, but sales should still be like other comic book movies. I will say that it will be more evenly spread this year among pirates, Superman and Xmen, probably making over 500 million each. As far as what studios make is much harder to determine. But it would not be under 50%, because frankly, when you have a franchise film, the studio usually owns at least 50% of the franchise.
Add in another safe 250 million dollars to Warner bros, and Superman will have earned 680 million dollars already on a 250 million investment. That is a 430 million profit.

The most important part to look at that even though Superman is a disappointment, and Im not even trying to defend it. The point is that even theatrically Superman will only loose Warner Bros, 5-60 million dollars.

There are other areas such as video games, and of course other tie ins with businesses that have sponsored them. Im not as sure about those numbers, so I can't go into them into detail, but hopefully this will give you some sort of idea what I was talking about.