drotto

That is the entire thing. With Batman and Superman in the movie it should have done Avenger numbers or at least been close. The goalpost has been moved. After Avengers, AoU, Dark Knight, Dark Knight Rises, Jurassic World, Star Wars, etc., the box office mark of success for these big blockbuster, tent pole movies is now 1 billion. That is not to say that "smaller" solo films are a failure when they make $600 or $700 mil, but the expectations for those movies are lower to start with.

It`s not just the billion,but it was also critically savaged to go along with it that could be a concern. That`s the point. One or the other it`s just fine,but to have missed both targets of 1 billion and less than 30 percent on Rotten Tomatoes is a red light. Does anybody really think a second BVS would be greenlighted now? This is the disappointment. Warner/DC shot their full wad,and it didn`t live up to expectations both critically and box office wise. This viewpoint is coming from somebody who defended the movie. What do you think the non-kool-aid drinkers are thinking about BVS? Damage has been done. I am now thinking a Man of Steel 2 movie might have been a better option than going right for the big splash with BVS. Nobody is saying the movie did not make money. Based on current projections BvS is going to be around $900 Mil. This is going to net WB about 150 mil. When people are saying the movie failed, they mean it has failed to meet expectations, not failed to be profitable. This movie should not be struggling to hit $1 bil. It should have had the potential to get near Avengers numbers at $1.5 bil. So from the expectations standpoint, it clearly failed to hit the mark. When you put your two most known and loved characters in one film, expectations go up. And like it or not, from a money standpoint for big tent pole movies 1 billion is the current goalpost. The critical aspect is also a failure, which again has nothing to do with an individual loving BvS. Nolan's Batman films were praised by the critics, most of the Marvel movies have been at least well received. It was clear that the film companies had figured out how to make superhero movies that both fans and critics would like. With the amount of time, and money spent on this film the critical response should have at least been on par with MoS, or the middle level Marvel films (from a critic standpoint). I am not sure what happened during the production of this film where they were not able to reach at least that benchmark. WB knows how to make movies that will at least be liked if not loved by critics. So what happened here? Not as successful, but Amazing Spider-Man made over $700 mil. It made Sony a good amount of money. But due to critical response, bad word of mouth, and failing to meet box office expectations, the movie was still considered a failure. That is why Sony was convinced to abandon the franchise and sell the character back to Disney.

What have time been looking like for non modern stuff?

The actor had done some typical press type stuff prior to the final episode, that was not really revealing. The only maybe interesting thing he said was a reminder to the fans that the comic and TV show may be different so do not base your guess on what happens because it happened in the comic.

Interesting article about the truth about Movie economics. http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2016/04/06/was-the-400-million-warner-bros-paid-for-batman-v-superman-a-good-investment/#3f7b11af7d67

Interesting article about the business side, since we have been talking about it some here. http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain/2016/04/06/was-the-400-million-warner-bros-paid-for-batman-v-superman-a-good-investment/#3f7b11af7d67

The percentage that theater gets is a sliding scale. For the first 2 weeks or so the production company gets most of the money, then the numbers start sliding over to the theater.

I'm not sure I agree with the Avengers assumption. But I do wish there had been a way to tell a story such more people would have left the theater being excited over the film. This way, they would be cheering for the next movies to come out. There are plenty of folks positive after the film. But more would be nice. And that is ultimately where the problem with this film may be. After leaving each Marvel film, the general public was excited to see the next film. After seeing Avengers most people left feeling very happy that the movie lived up to expectations, and they wanted more. Marvel (not AoU) was following success up with success. I am not sure BvS has instilled in the general public that need to see what comes next. Did it launch the DCCU? I think WW will do well, I am betting numbers similar to the higher grossing Marvel solo films. But without the foundation that Marvel laid out, is the public going to care about Justice League? Are those characters enough additional draw to make JL DC's Avengers, especially when the three main draw characters have already been seen together on film, and failed to get that high. Part of what drove Avengers was the public was excited to see all those characters together for the first time, DC does not have that card to play now.

People are not comparing apples to apples here when they are trying to put BvS up against earlier Marvel movies. All the early Marvel movies were much lower budget movies with characters with little public recognition. Between marketing and movie budget, those early Marvel movies had roughly half the budget of BvS. The budget for Avengers was about 100 mil lower than BvS (marketing and production budget). So BvS is the most expensive of the films. WB spent on this film like they were all in. The profit ratio is not even close to the Marvel films. I am not sure that comparing BvS to Avengers is 100% fair either. Marvel did an amazing job of building both goodwill and character recognition in its first few years. With that said on a scale of 1 being like a Marvel new character solo movie and 10 being Avengers, BvS is about a 7 as far a type of film. It is more like Avengers, from a tent pole standpoint. Do not kid yourselves, WB through everything at this film. Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman were all in it. Other DC characters are just not that important from a public standpoint. It should have performed more like the Avengers, as opposed to performing moderately better than Ant-Man or GotG. This does not mean the movie is not profitable, and did not do well, but it should have done better. Avengers would have also been profitable at the numbers that BvS is getting, would we have called that a failure if it had performed similar? Marvel has set the money bar very high, WB despite what they have said, wanted to at least hit the bar. As other have said, how many bullets have they left in the gun?

For a movie that is planned as 2 or more films there is always a very difficult balance between using a big gun Villain or threat, and still leaving room to up the anti in later films.

I think it was at 72 or 73% last weekend. I think you are right. Rotten Tomatoes doesn't maintain some trending charts on those stats. I think the high water mark for fans on RT was 85% on Wednesday or Thursday last week. It was 73% by the end of the weekend. I also agree that the fan that has been awaiting the movie for years is much more likely to be forgiving, and the general audience is more likely to listen to critics and be harsher on the film. So the drop makes sense.

For better or worse, DC has already given themselves the ultimate out by establishing the Multiverse in the Flash the last two seasons. As they just showed in the Supergirl crossover, all these characters are part of the DC universe, just not the same Earth. So in my mind BvS can be considered all part of the family. Not saying I like it, but that is what you have.

Good. That's my second biggest complaint with BvS, after the fact that Batman was too out of character for my taste. Unfortunately, most people view late re-shoots as the studio either lacking confidence in the film or meddling with the film to appease public perceptions. It could make the movie worse.

Is there any irony to the fact the if BvS' RT score finishes at the current 29, it is the numerals flipped from Avengers 92?

In Ben's mind....... Wow, I don't want to be here, but they gave me a ton of money to be here ... happy face happy face happy face......... not working... happy face.... not working.. Screw it, just look blankly into space, and remember I'm BATM........ No I'm Ben, but I can still buy or get any girl I want.

The fan score on RT is also starting to slide. It was in the mid 80's at the beginning of the week is now at 74%. This is worries me because the people that saw the movie last night were the diehard I must see this people. As we roll through the weekend the average movie goer come more into play. I do think this movie is almost bulletproof this weekend. I have seen a few analysts say the negative reviews MAY decrease sales in the ballpark of 10% from baseline. Box Office Mojo put their projections at $157 mil. to $185 mil. opening weekend. That seems accurate. What everyone is concerned with is that all important second weekend hold, and to a lesser extent Sunday hold especially with the holiday. I think it is safe to say 300 to 350 this weekend worldwide. But if they drop what MoS did second weekend (which was 64%) or worse, it make the high end earning estimates of 1 bil. plus hard.

Glad to see people here that have seen the movie are being honest. And what you are saying seems to fall in line with what most of the critics are saying, if you actually read the reviews as opposed to turning the review into a simple +1 or -1. From what I am seeing. The cast is adequate to good. Lex is an issue however. The pacing and storytelling is disjointed, somewhat shallow, and there are some plot holes. It is coming across for some as overly dark. The fight scenes are good, but not groundbreaking. Doomsday was stolen from Lord of the Rings. Overall the board average at this point sounds like about a B-. Really sounds to me like Snyder and his editing crew need to be gone, and possibly a new writing crew. The cast however can stay. Shows why Disney has made the decision to be constantly rotating in new directors and writers on Marvel and Star Wars films.

Yeap, GL was a disaster. So fine retool and learn from that, I would not expect this movie to be a comedy. Critics are just pointing out there seems to be nothing to act as even a little bit of a counterbalance, life needs a little humor. Also, most critics are pointing out that they pulled the fun out as well as the humor. When I go to a movie, I go in with a certain list of expectations, which changes based on the type of film. I would not go into Schindler's List expecting to have fun. I go in expecting to find a well crafted, emotional, intellectually stimulating film. When I go into a Superhero film I expect good characters, an interesting film, but ultimately the movie to be escapist fun. So my expectations are clearly different. It is great to try and brake free of expectations at times, but to do that generally requires an exceptional film, for instance The Dark Knight Rises. It requires a special type of writer, director, and creative group to make that work.

Because pre-release the vast majority of "fans" who are able to watch it are diehards who are prone to not be negative about it (for many reasons). I'd actually consider 79% low considering the pool. And that's not just this movie, but any release. Even with Deadpool which was getting crazy good buzz from the pre-release fan screenings, even tho while that proved true, you usually ignore them because of the nature of who most of those people are. The fan number has also been dropping steadily over the last few days also. It was around 85% two days ago. The fan number is also far more variable as who is posting. Most online general public reviews are heavily tilted to people that loved it and to people that hated it, while the majority middle ground will not care enough to post. There is a sizable fan base that want desperately for this movie to be good and successful. Those people are attempting to stuff the ballot box, and would be unlikely to admit it if the movie was bad regardless. They are not capable of being subjective. I am not capable of being subjective because I have not seen the damn movie. I also doubt how many of those 2000 fan reviews are legitimate reviews vs people posting their predetermined opinion, because the movie is not out yet. The only people we can be sure have seen the film at this point are the critics, for better or worse. BTW it is now 32% critics and 78% fans.

They're also ignoring the good work being done on the TV side in favor of redoing everything for the movie side. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, why they would recast the Flash and ignore the whole TV universe they've built in favor of a new actor/back story is simply beyond me. I'm guessing they'll waste the Supergirl they're building on TV as well, if they ever decide to bring her into the movie side. Its funny you mention the DCTV stuff, because their shows have be consistently excellent. Flash is unapologetic about bringing a very colorful, hopeful, generally upbeat version to life. It is an excellent example of applying Marvel lessons and creating a DC world (even better than most of the Marvel shows have done). The TV shows have not fallen hopelessly into grim and dirty worlds absent of humor. In general they do a great job of balancing funny moments and darker topics, and remain well written and most importantly fun.

Tell me when this misconception that in order for a movie to be considered serious, thoughtful, or adult (especially in a genre like superhero movies), that the movie must be dark and gritty? Life is a mixture of light and dark, it is not constantly one cord, and it can at times change quickly in tone. I am not saying DC should be Marvel (it needs to be its own thing), but they can take some of the things that Marvel clearly does right like mixing tones, and different style into their films, and create a DC style. The reviews make it sound like BvS was so determined not to emulate the lighter, sometimes funny, and sometimes corny Marvel style that they pulled out anything that could be seen as copying Marvel and only left darkness. BvS is so concerned with not being Marvel, that they lost any sense of fun. DC has left itself in a very difficult position. On one side, they so desperately want the same leave of success and profit that the MCU has enjoyed, and are trying to copy that. On the other hand, they want to be seen as not Marvel, so they are ignoring the lessons that Marvel has learned over the last 5 or 6 years, which could be used to make a strong DCCU.

Makes me want to see it now even more. Best review so far! Jeez, that was a dense read. Makes the movie sound like a Saw marathon. I am trying to be optimistic as it is now 34 percent at Rotten Tomatoes which is rated lower than the Ben Affleck Daredevil! Did you ever get that sinking feeling? Now at 33%. Metacritic is at 44.

I still contend it will not greatly affect opening weekend. The movie should she 300 to 350 mil worldwide. Then it is going to fall off a cliff unless word of mouth is good despite the critics.

OK this is the funniest pull quote I saw on RT. Not judging the movie just funny. The story, like the testicles of a weightlifter on steroids, dwindles away to nothing. ----- Lawrence Toppman , Charlotte Observer

Actually I don't see much of either of those extremes in the reviews so far. Most have it as a ok film. Neither great nor awful. Grades seem to be in the 1.5-3.5 out of 5 or C- to C+. But how do you put out a movie this crucial to their plans and only give us an OK C grade movie?