[font=century gothic]If Singer follows the same track with his X-Men fims, yes he will. Many people considered the first to be weak, and the second to be near perfect. If he delivers the fights and action everyone expects in a Superman film, plus the love story, plus being a half hour shorter, it's going to do very well. As of right now though, I see The Dark Knight making more money. Whether I feel the same way in three years is completely different.[/font]

Dark Knight won't make any more $$$ than what BEGINS made cause it'll be the same audience that saw BEGINS and barely cracked 200 Million Domestically.. With that having been said, this will do better than a SR sequel cause no one cares about this character anymore hence SR not even breaking 200 Million and being considerd a "DUD".. It would be in WB's best interest to not make anymore DC Comicbook movie's except for BATMAN cause it's the only thing close to the definition of "Right" that they've done so far, even if it was boring.. Perhaps the sequel wil make up for that though??

[font=century gothic]Let me get this straight. It would be in WB's best interest not to make anymore DC films, but stick with Batman although you believe the sequel won't make as much money as Begins did. Did I get that right?[/font]



[font=century gothic]I think I'm the fourth person to tell you this, but I'll repeat it anyways. The movie will reach the $200 million mark simply because it has $193,000 (That's THOUSAND) left to make.[/font]

To your 1st Question: YES, To be very blunt, WB sucks at DC Comic films as evident with 2 of the BATMAN movie's by Schumacher, 2 were good by Burton and now Nolan apparently has hit all the right marks with the batfans in BEGINS more than Bryan Singer did with his boytoy Brandon Routh and the quizzical as hell plot of his now gone SUPERMAN RETURNS which was FORGOTTEN very quickly.. When you add that up, WB has done more right with the BATMAN franchise and basically blew it with SUPERMAN and should stick with BATMAN only as sort of a "lesser of 2 evil's" type of situation.. As for SR reaching 200 Million and only 193,000 dollars left to do it?? It's pretty pathetic when the SR fanboys are counting it down to the last dollar in ensuring this movie gross 200 Million.. I wouldn't be surprised if WB donated the extra 193,000 dollars as a charity case just to say to the media that SUPERMAN finally broke 200 Million cause of it's so called "Popularity".. It's almost been reduced to desperation now on the part of fans and WB over SUPERMAN not being the end to end all superhero movie that it was being made out to be..

[font=century gothic]It was forgotten and yet is still playing in it's 17th week. Whether or not it's thanks to Warner Brothers, it's still making money.[/font]



[font=century gothic]Agreed.[/font]

[font=century gothic]and basically blew it with SUPERMAN and should stick with BATMAN only as sort of a "lesser of 2 evil's" type of situation..[/quote]

They made profit on a film which they were losing money on and tried to lift off the ground for ten years. How is that a failure again?



[font=century gothic]And what do you care. I hate to bring up these two movies again, but this is coming from someone who loves Hulk and AVP. [/font]



[font=century gothic][sarcasm]But wait. How do they make money if they donate it to themselves? Daaavy?[/sarcasm][/font]



[font=century gothic]Not really. There is going to be a sequel. And if that rumor is true at all, this means there will definetly be one, but I didn't really buy into that rumor when it was released after Pirates came out. $200 million is just a nice round pretty number (Restraining myself from a joke). Superman isn't just another franchise that the WB can toss to the side whether you believe that or not. Why else would they spend ten years developing, make an overall profit ($390 worldwide with not all of the numbers in yet), and then throw it away?[/font]

They made profit on a film which they were losing money on and tried to lift off the ground for ten years. How is that a failure again?



[font=century gothic]And what do you care. I hate to bring up these two movies again, but this is coming from someone who loves Hulk and AVP. [/font]



[font=century gothic][sarcasm]But wait. How do they make money if they donate it to themselves? Daaavy?[/sarcasm][/font]



[font=century gothic]Not really. There is going to be a sequel. And if that rumor is true at all, this means there will definetly be one, but I didn't really buy into that rumor when it was released after Pirates came out. $200 million is just a nice round pretty number (Restraining myself from a joke). Superman isn't just another franchise that the WB can toss to the side whether you believe that or not. Why else would they spend ten years developing, make an overall profit ($390 worldwide with not all of the numbers in yet), and then throw it away?[/font][/quote]

They spent 10 years developing this turd cause they needed to try their hand at something else other than BATMAN.. Pretty soon, we'll see Jack Black as GREEN LANTERN according to another rumor.. Good call WB in that casting.. And at this point, it isn't a question of making more $$$ for SR if WB is pulling $$$ out of their pocket as charity to boost it to 200 Million.. All they have to say is that it hit 200 Million and convince rag mags like EW that it's true and pin it all on IMAX as the sole contributor.. This movie is on it's way out of the Dollar show where I live cause it's not making enough dollars that people care anymore.. The movie was flat out a failure and cost more to bring to the screen then it made domestically and you know it... In short: It sucked.. The end..

[font=century gothic]I like the font.

1. It's been in second run theaters for about three weeks now. Films usually don't have that long of a run in second run theaters. Superman left mine a week ago. Unless you work for your dollar theater, you really have no idea why it's leaving. It's leaving because it spent it's few weeks there and left.

2. They are not pulling money out of their pocket because there is no point in doing that since they would lose more money. I do agree though they are trying to get it to $200 million, although it could've stopped $10 million ago and that would not have influenced their view on a sequel one way or another.

3. Can Jack Black fit in that suit?

4. A failure? It reintroduced the character and managed to make $200 million dollars. Whether you like it or not the sequel is going to make even more money. The film wasn't as beloved as Batman Begins and Spider-Man 2, but for the most part, people seemed to enjoy it. 40,000 votes isn't a lot to go on based on the millions of tickets sold, but it still has a 7.1 on there. The original has a 7.2. That's not bad.

5. Even though they have made a profit with this film, let's just pretend for your sake it hasn't. The reintroduced the character. They have released all of the Superman related DVD's this year (The George Reeves series, Superboy, Lois and Clark, the 14-Disc special edition, the original films in a box set, Smallville, etc). Where do you think a good chunk of that money is going. Warner Brothers. And then you have the toys, not to mention the video game coming out in November. They didn't just reintroduce the character on film, they reintroduced merchandising cash cow.

6. AVP sucked. The End.[/font]

supermans 2 worlwide gross > batman 2 world wide gros
superman 2 domestic gross <batman> batman 2 cost

Passed $200 million.

$200-250m??? This is the dumbest thread I've ever come across. WTF were you thinking? Why don't I just start a Pirates $200-500m dollar thread, huh???


GOD! This makes me want to do violent things to Mr. X!!

why bring this thread back? was there really a point?

Box, the film was so boring, that some thought it wouldnt hit 200.