Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice movie thread for your reading pleasure 2 2

[Davenport]

Well, I did my part for the 2nd week. Saturday I was telling a friend all about BvS, how much I enjoyed it. I'm sure I was going on and on...

 

Saturday night he called from a theater. He was taking his wife, son, daughter and her boyfriend.

 

I crossed my fingers they would all like it. Taking an entire family is a lot of money.

 

...And I got a call today about how much they enjoyed themselves.

 

To me it's the 1st time Batman and Superman have been played with zero cheeziness. Clark Kent isn't some bumbling buffoon, there's no bat-nipples or neon hockey sticks. Finally, rich complex characters in an unfolding adult storyline, who happen to be Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman.

'Bout damn time.

 

 

I thought that Affleck was a wonderful Batman.

I was a little stunned at the mass murder part, but it was not nearly as bad as Ultron and I even enjoyed that movie.

 

My only criticism was that WW should have thrown the spear. Then again, I had forgotten that Supes was killed by Doomsday.

 

 

Batman has never been portrayed better imho (excluding Kevin Conroy/B:TAS/JL/JLU.

 

I keep thinking about that young cop "he's still here" scene. The tension building, readying his shotgun, Batman hanging there in the dark... then gone so FAST. It was perfect, the way I imagine Batman when reading .

 

 

I think most complaints of Batman are because this Batman in this Universe has had a full 20 year career without Superman's existence/influence/inspiration. That's new and has to be taken into account. It's what Alfred was speaking to, about becoming cruel.

 

[miraclemet]

Saturday and Sunday estimates show 55.5% and 56.9% drops (saturday over saturday and sunday over sunday). Better than I thought it would do.

 

 

MOS did -55.4% and -65.5%

DKR did -45% and -51.1%

GL did -57.7% and -67%

 

so it's about at MOS levels of decline (some of SvB first sunday numbers were depressed due to Easter, so I expected it to not fall as far typical sunday over sunday numbers).

 

 

 

[Bosco685]

WB Not Concerned With BATMAN V SUPERMAN's 2nd Weekend Drop; Focused On Bigger Picture

 

The film's box office total now stands at $681 million worldwide. Though the drop off was larger than expected, the film is still currently projected to reach the $1 billion mark before finishing up its run and that's exactly what WB is focusing on. Warner Bros. domestic distribution chief Jeff Goldstein provided this response to The Hollywood Reporter concerning Dawn of Justice's box office performance.

 

"We’re not concerned with the drop. No matter how you slice it, to get to $52 million on any given weekend is an enormous accomplishment. We’re most focused on where we are in total. And our global number is huge."

 

Early reports swayed most into thinking that $800 million was the magic number Dawn of Justice needed to earn at the box office in order to break even. However, WB later refuted that figure by stating it was inflated, leading many to believe that the actual break-even number was closer to $750 million.

[ComicConnoisseur]

I think it will end up beating Deadpool, both domestically and worldwide ($355 / $755 so far), but it has an advantage in that Deadpool didn't have China.

 

Still it's notable that Deadpool made more in its second weekend than Batman v. Superman despite having a first weekend haul more than $30 million less.

 

At this point, it's a stretch to see Batman v. Superman breaking $400 million domestic total, which means:

 

1) a worse showing than Iron Man III, and

2) It's already made 2/3s of its total projected U.S. haul

If it doesn't do 1 billion this will be considered not good from Warner`s standpoint.

[rjrjr]

Here is how I look at it. Marvel's first 2 movies were:

 

Iron Man

Domestic: $318,412,101

Global: $585,174,222

 

Incredible Hulk

Domestic: $134,806,913

Global: $263,427,551

 

Total

Domestic: $453,219,014

Global: $848,601,773

 

DCs first 2 movies are:

 

Man of Steel

Domestic: $291,045,518

Global: $668,045,518

 

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice

Domestic: $261,457,793

Global: $682,857,793

 

Total

Domestic: $552,503,311

Global: $1,350,903,311

 

DC is half a billion dollars ahead of Marvel at this point. Even with inflation, DC is well ahead and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice hasn't even finished it's theatrical run and will probably tack on another $300 million before it is all said and done which will put it around twice the box office take where Marvel was at this point.

 

It took time for Marvel to build up goodwill for its movies before Avengers came out and killed it at the box office. DC doesn't have to hit home runs right now. It has already started generating excitement for the standalone Batman and Wonder Woman movies. Justice League will do even better than this movie. Everyone is trying to compare DC movies to Marvel's hit movies, failing to realize it took Marvel 6 movies and 4 years to get a movie over the $1 billion mark. And DC is going to come close on just their 2nd movie.

 

And we have no clue which DC character is going to resonate with today's audiences. Marvel bet twice the Incredible Hulk was their big character and look how that turned out. It ended up being a B-lister, Iron Man, that was the hit character for them. Maybe DC's biggest character is going to be Cyborg, Wonder Woman, or some character we don't even know about yet. Marvel will never have the ability to control all their theatrical appearances of their characters (so we'll never see Avengers and X-Men together), whereas DC is in full control of their entire stable of characters.

 

For all the doom and gloom over this movie, I agree with Warner Bros. How could this be anything but a success for them and a good sophomore outing? Was everyone so doom and gloom over the Incredible Hulk, which Marvel thought was their biggest character? And do we really think this is the high mark for DC? Was Avengers Marvel's high mark and is everything else down hill for them too? Or are there bigger and better movies on the horizon? DC hasn't even introduced the Justice League yet.

 

I think things are bright for both movie-verses. And congratulations to Warner Bros. for a hit sophomore movie on their 2nd outing.

Edited April 4, 2016 by rjrjr

[Bosco685]

If it doesn't do 1 billion this will be considered not good from Warner`s standpoint.

 

That is actually not an accurate assessment.

 

Warner was using this movie as it's DCU launchpad as opposed to Man of Steel. So having all these characters that appeared in BvS branch off into team and individual movies was the big bang for DC/Warner.

 

An article I posted earlier shows Warner saying the target they needed to hit was somewhere between $750 to $800 MM. Although with the current figures, the movie has already passed the 2.5X Revenue Ratio target. So they are accounting for the marketing expense now to break even or better.

[ComicConnoisseur]

If it doesn't do 1 billion this will be considered not good from Warner`s standpoint.

 

That is actually not an accurate assessment.

 

Warner was using this movie as it's DCU launchpad as opposed to Man of Steel. So having all these characters that appeared in BvS branch off into team and individual movies was the big bang for DC/Warner.

 

An article I posted earlier shows Warner saying the target they needed to hit was somewhere between $750 to $800 MM. Although with the current figures, the movie has already passed the 2.5X Revenue Ratio target. So they are accounting for the marketing expense now to break even or better.

it just seems that the two biggest superheroes together should do 1 billion.

The last two Batman movies each did over 1 billion alone.

I loved the BVS movie,but I will be disappointed,as well as I would think Warner would be if BVS doesn`t break a billiion.

 

Really I can see some Warner corporate suits saying jeez we went thru all this BVS hype and we didn`t even get a billion like the solo Batman movies do.

So let`s just do solo Ben Affleck Batman movies because we know they will bring in 1 billiion box office.

In other words the safe bet is just make Batman related movies every two years,while now be cautious about the rest.

I now see the pressure will be on the Suicide Squad to deliver GotG numbers at the box office.

[Captain_Pike]

+1

One Billion is the target.

Unfortunately, BvS is gonna finish about $360ish (dom) & $900ish (WW).

Very disappointing.

[rjrjr]

+1

One Billion is the target.

Unfortunately, BvS is gonna finish about $360ish (dom) & $900ish (WW).

Very disappointing.

 

Too funny.

 

$1 billion dollars is a lofty goal for any movie. Very few movies (just 24 according to Box Office Mojo) have crossed that mark. $900 million dollars is a lot of money for a movie to make and I'll bet Warner Bros. is just fine with that. Would they have liked to make more? Sure. But it is still going to be what, the 6th highest superhero movie ever. And considering the critical reviews of this movie, that is pretty impressive.

 

Warner Bros. has only had 10 movies cross the $900 million mark. And 4 of those were Harry Potter and 4 were Hobbit/Lord of the Rings. The other 2 were Batman movies. This movie will be joining a relatively small club.

 

Our expectations for these movies has really gotten out of whack because a few superhero movies have done well. Was Ant Man a bomb because it only made $520 million? And I guess GOTG, which is arguably Marvel's best MCU movie, only made $775 million. What a disappointment.

 

I'm guessing if Civil War does not cross $1 billion, that is going to be a disappointment too, correct?

Edited April 4, 2016 by rjrjr

[Brian48]

Plus, there's still more revenue pending when the Blu-Ray goes up for sale. Especially if Snyder offers an extended cut right out the gate.

[Bosco685]

Too funny.

 

$1 billion dollars is a lofty goal for any movie. Very few movies (just 24 according to Box Office Mojo) have crossed that mark. $900 million dollars is a lot of money for a movie to make and I'll bet Warner Bros. is just fine with that. Would they have liked to make more? Sure. But it is still going to be what, the 6th highest superhero movie ever. And considering the critical reviews of this movie, that is pretty impressive.

 

Our expectations for these movies has really gotten out of whack because a few superhero movies have done well. Was Ant Man a bomb because it only made $520 million? And I guess GOTG, which is arguably Marvel's best MCU movie, only made $775 million. What a disappointment.

 

I'm guessing if Civil War does not cross $1 billion, that is going to be a disappointment too, correct?

 

Poor movies like Iron Man 2, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy. They never had a chance.

 

 

[miraclemet]

Here is how I look at it. Marvel's first 2 movies were:

 

Iron Man

Domestic: $318,412,101

Global: $585,174,222

 

Incredible Hulk

Domestic: $134,806,913

Global: $263,427,551

 

Total

Domestic: $453,219,014

Global: $848,601,773

 

DCs first 2 movies are:

 

Man of Steel

Domestic: $291,045,518

Global: $668,045,518

 

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice

Domestic: $261,457,793

Global: $682,857,793

 

Total

Domestic: $552,503,311

Global: $1,350,903,311

 

DC is half a billion dollars ahead of Marvel at this point. Even with inflation, DC is well ahead and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice hasn't even finished it's theatrical run and will probably tack on another $300 million before it is all said and done which will put it around twice the box office take where Marvel was at this point.

 

talk about mauling data to try to make a point...

 

You are comparing a pair of 2008 Marvel movies vs a 2013 and 2016 release>

 

Ignoring just the inflation point movie theaters now...

 

• Push the Thursday preview screens far more than they did in the past
  
• Ticket presales are far more prevalent
  
• revenue now gets a big boost from IMAX and 3D price bumps
  
• global sales relationships are leaps ahead of where they were last decade. Used to be domestic/internation splits were pretty even (ie. 50/50), which is what you saw back in '08 (and part of why Titanics numbers in '97 were so awe inspiring)

 

Marvel was forging a path that DC has benefited from, and that was in spite of not having full control over its cinematic IP.

Marvel basically has conditioned audiences to the super hero trope (of course they benefited from the nostalgia of the Superman and Batman movies of 20-30 years prior) and they had the help of successful Spiderman movies by Sony, but again as I said with the earlier points, the movie revenue landscape is pretty different from what it was last decade.

[rjrjr]

You are comparing a pair of 2008 Marvel movies vs a 2013 and 2016 release>

 

Ignoring just the inflation point movie theaters now...

 

Isn't everyone else comparing this movie to the other superhero movies? Otherwise, how did they come to the conclusion $1 billion dollars is some sort of magical threshold where this movie will be a success or failure for Warner Bros.?

 

Inflation included, these first 2 DC movies still beat the first 2 Marvel movies, by a lot.

 

So, since Marvel primed the market for superhero movies, Ant Man's paltry $520 million was a disappointment, correct? And GOTG, arguably Marvel's best movie, with only $775 million must have been a disappointment too. And if Civil War does not cross $1 billion, Disney should be disappointed, correct?

 

Or is it possible, our expectations have been skewed for one reason or another?

Edited April 4, 2016 by rjrjr

[revat]

Too funny.

 

$1 billion dollars is a lofty goal for any movie. Very few movies (just 24 according to Box Office Mojo) have crossed that mark. $900 million dollars is a lot of money for a movie to make and I'll bet Warner Bros. is just fine with that. Would they have liked to make more? Sure. But it is still going to be what, the 6th highest superhero movie ever. And considering the critical reviews of this movie, that is pretty impressive.

 

Our expectations for these movies has really gotten out of whack because a few superhero movies have done well. Was Ant Man a bomb because it only made $520 million? And I guess GOTG, which is arguably Marvel's best MCU movie, only made $775 million. What a disappointment.

 

I'm guessing if Civil War does not cross $1 billion, that is going to be a disappointment too, correct?

 

Poor movies like Iron Man 2, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy. They never had a chance.

 

 

 

not every movie is expected to make $1B, but in the age of superheroes now...with the two most well known superheroes in history (PLUS WONDER WOMAN), throwing in an A-level celeb, when Man of Steel did nearly $700M?? When their biggest competitor made $1B+ with an average movie (AOU)?

 

Its about expectations this movie was their biggest and best bullet, and they wounded but didn't get the kill. If Zack Snyder came in and said, I'm going to make a dark, heavy movie which critics will hate and will be a solid double for your future franchise, do you think that would have been good enough for the execs? When you're doing Batman v Superman with the first WW sighting EVER in the movies, with a zillion more movies lined up, you gotta knock some runs in.

 

Man of Steel was a bunt single.

BvS was a double, but didn't score the guy on first.

Runners on second and third is a pretty solid place to be, but it didn't affect the scoreboard.

 

And Marvel will get their chance to go 'hero v hero' coming up next, and they can do a LOT of damage to DC if they do it better (which I expect them to). People's wives and girlfriends and children can only tolerate so many superhero movies in given year, and I would guess most of them are more excited about Ant-Man 2, GOTG 2, and Avengers 3 than they are about Justice League or Aquaman or Cyborg or Flash, though I'd think many are excited about Wonder Woman.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Revat

[paperheart]

Here is how I look at it. Marvel's first 2 movies were:

 

Iron Man

Domestic: $318,412,101

Global: $585,174,222

 

Incredible Hulk

Domestic: $134,806,913

Global: $263,427,551

 

Total

Domestic: $453,219,014

Global: $848,601,773

 

DCs first 2 movies are:

 

Man of Steel

Domestic: $291,045,518

Global: $668,045,518

 

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice

Domestic: $261,457,793

Global: $682,857,793

 

Total

Domestic: $552,503,311

Global: $1,350,903,311

 

DC is half a billion dollars ahead of Marvel at this point. Even with inflation, DC is well ahead and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice hasn't even finished it's theatrical run and will probably tack on another $300 million before it is all said and done which will put it around twice the box office take where Marvel was at this point.

 

talk about mauling data to try to make a point...

 

You are comparing a pair of 2008 Marvel movies vs a 2013 and 2016 release>

 

Ignoring just the inflation point movie theaters now...

 

• Push the Thursday preview screens far more than they did in the past
  
• Ticket presales are far more prevalent
  
• revenue now gets a big boost from IMAX and 3D price bumps
  
• global sales relationships are leaps ahead of where they were last decade. Used to be domestic/internation splits were pretty even (ie. 50/50), which is what you saw back in '08 (and part of why Titanics numbers in '97 were so awe inspiring)

 

Marvel was forging a path that DC has benefited from, and that was in spite of not having full control over its cinematic IP.

Marvel basically has conditioned audiences to the super hero trope (of course they benefited from the nostalgia of the Superman and Batman movies of 20-30 years prior) and they had the help of successful Spiderman movies by Sony, but again as I said with the earlier points, the movie revenue landscape is pretty different from what it was last decade.

 

not to mention the fact that Marvel's production budget on those 2 was $290MM vs $475MM for WB's first two. or that the box office from China, the least profitable region by far, was $25MM for the Marvel movies vs $160MM for the WB movies.

[Bosco685]

not every movie is expected to make $1B, but in the age of superheroes now...with the two most well known superheroes in history (PLUS WONDER WOMAN), throwing in an A-level celeb, when Man of Steel did nearly $700M?? When their biggest competitor made $1B+ with an average movie (AOU)?

 

Its about expectations this movie was their biggest and best bullet, and they wounded but didn't get the kill. If Zack Snyder came in and said, I'm going to make a dark, heavy movie which critics will hate and will be a solid double for your future franchise, do you think that would have been good enough for the execs? When you're doing Batman v Superman with the first WW sighting EVER in the movies, with a zillion more movies lined up, you gotta knock some runs in.

 

Man of Steel was a bunt single.

BvS was a double, but didn't score the guy on first.

Runners on second and third is a pretty solid place to be, but it didn't affect the scoreboard.

 

And Marvel will get their chance to go 'hero v hero' coming up next, and they can do a LOT of damage to DC if they do it better (which I expect them to). People's wives and girlfriends and children can only tolerate so many superhero movies in given year, and I would guess most of them are more excited about Ant-Man 2, GOTG 2, and Avengers 3 than they are about Justice League or Aquaman or Cyborg or Flash, though I'd think many are excited about Wonder Woman.

 

Avengers = Justice League

 

I wouldn't assume going from Man of Steel to Batman v Superman in this new DCU is that jump that takes the film to a $1 B candidate. Marvel had 5 movies before it went to Avengers.

 

- Iron Man

- The Incredible Hulk

- Iron Man 2

- Thor

- Captain America: The First Avenger

 

Why are we assuming the jump for DC/Warner should be Man of Steel to Batman v Superman = $1 B?

[rjrjr]

Too funny.

 

$1 billion dollars is a lofty goal for any movie. Very few movies (just 24 according to Box Office Mojo) have crossed that mark. $900 million dollars is a lot of money for a movie to make and I'll bet Warner Bros. is just fine with that. Would they have liked to make more? Sure. But it is still going to be what, the 6th highest superhero movie ever. And considering the critical reviews of this movie, that is pretty impressive.

 

Our expectations for these movies has really gotten out of whack because a few superhero movies have done well. Was Ant Man a bomb because it only made $520 million? And I guess GOTG, which is arguably Marvel's best MCU movie, only made $775 million. What a disappointment.

 

I'm guessing if Civil War does not cross $1 billion, that is going to be a disappointment too, correct?

 

Poor movies like Iron Man 2, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy. They never had a chance.

 

 

 

not every movie is expected to make $1B, but in the age of superheroes now...with the two most well known superheroes in history (PLUS WONDER WOMAN), throwing in an A-level celeb, when Man of Steel did nearly $700M?? When their biggest competitor made $1B+ with an average movie (AOU)?

 

Its about expectations this movie was their biggest and best bullet, and they wounded but didn't get the kill. If Zack Snyder came in and said, I'm going to make a dark, heavy movie which critics will hate and will be a solid double for your future franchise, do you think that would have been good enough for the execs? When you're doing Batman v Superman with the first WW sighting EVER in the movies, with a zillion more movies lined up, you gotta knock some runs in.

 

Man of Steel was a bunt single.

BvS was a double, but didn't score the guy on first.

Runners on second and third is a pretty solid place to be, but it didn't affect the scoreboard.

 

And Marvel will get their chance to go 'hero v hero' coming up next, and they can do a LOT of damage to DC if they do it better (which I expect them to). People's wives and girlfriends and children can only tolerate so many superhero movies in given year, and I would guess most of them are more excited about Ant-Man 2, GOTG 2, and Avengers 3 than they are about Justice League or Aquaman or Cyborg or Flash, though I'd think many are excited about Wonder Woman.

 

 

I think people are putting Batman and Superman on a pedestal which only Batman deserves. Superman has not been that big a movie draw outside his first movie way back in 1978, just look at the past movies revenue for this. And this movie is going to be the 3rd highest grossing Batman movie. Disappointing!

 

Marvel's Civil War movie should do very well. They've been priming audiences for 8 years now. Nobody cared about GOTG, Ant Man, etc. until those movies were made. Give DC a chance to get some movies out before you crucify them for not making $1 billion on each of these movies, okay? Marvel didn't (and still doesn't) make $1 billion on every one of their movies.

 

Marvel has had a chance to find out what characters click with movie audiences and which don't. The Incredible Hulk is what, Marvel's 3rd or 4th most important character which had some familiarity to audiences due to the TV series. And they couldn't make a go of that character with 2 tries. And I won't expect every DC character to succeed either. Let's see how Wonder Woman does compared to the Hulk: both had television series in the 1970s and both are important characters in their respective comic universes.

Edited April 4, 2016 by rjrjr

[Captain_Pike]

not every movie is expected to make $1B, but in the age of superheroes now...with the two most well known superheroes in history (PLUS WONDER WOMAN), throwing in an A-level celeb, when Man of Steel did nearly $700M?? When their biggest competitor made $1B+ with an average movie (AOU)?

 

Its about expectations this movie was their biggest and best bullet, and they wounded but didn't get the kill. If Zack Snyder came in and said, I'm going to make a dark, heavy movie which critics will hate and will be a solid double for your future franchise, do you think that would have been good enough for the execs? When you're doing Batman v Superman with the first WW sighting EVER in the movies, with a zillion more movies lined up, you gotta knock some runs in.

 

Man of Steel was a bunt single.

BvS was a double, but didn't score the guy on first.

Runners on second and third is a pretty solid place to be, but it didn't affect the scoreboard.

 

And Marvel will get their chance to go 'hero v hero' coming up next, and they can do a LOT of damage to DC if they do it better (which I expect them to). People's wives and girlfriends and children can only tolerate so many superhero movies in given year, and I would guess most of them are more excited about Ant-Man 2, GOTG 2, and Avengers 3 than they are about Justice League or Aquaman or Cyborg or Flash, though I'd think many are excited about Wonder Woman.

 

Avengers = Justice League

 

I wouldn't assume going from Man of Steel to Batman v Superman in this new DCU is that jump that takes the film to a $1 B candidate. Marvel 5 movies before it went to Avengers.

 

- Iron Man

- The Incredible Hulk

- Iron Man 2

- Thor

- Captain America: The First Avenger

 

Why are we assuming the jump for DC/Warner should be Man of Steel to Batman v Superman = $1 B?

 

1-Batman appearance

2-WW

3-Increase screens in China (Ant-Man made $105 million with crappy exchange rates versus BvS's $57million )

4-MOS 2.5x, BvS $166 (OW) times 2.5 = $414 million in a perfect world

Edited April 4, 2016 by Captain_Pike

[miraclemet]

You are comparing a pair of 2008 Marvel movies vs a 2013 and 2016 release>

 

Ignoring just the inflation point movie theaters now...

 

Isn't everyone else comparing this movie to the other superhero movies? Otherwise, how did they come to the conclusion $1 billion dollars is some sort of magical threshold where this movie will be a success or failure for Warner Bros.?

 

Inflation included, these first 2 DC movies still beat the first 2 Marvel movies, by a lot.

 

So, since Marvel primed the market for superhero movies, Ant Man's paltry $520 million was a disappointment, correct? And GOTG, arguably Marvel's best movie, with only $775 million must have been a disappointment too. And if Civil War does not cross $1 billion, Disney should be disappointed, correct?

 

Or is it possible, our expectations have been skewed for one reason or another?

 

Im confused...

 

Yes people are comparing SvB to other superhero movies... since they all share the same genre.

Some people are comparing them as cinematic creations

Some people are comparing them based on personal tastes

Some people are comparing their revenue.

Others are comparing their cost to their revenue.

 

People bandied around the 1 billion threshold for "profit" after WB talked (prior to the movie release) about them using $750m as a target for feeling the movie was successful (believe Bosco posted the links when it was news). Some online pundits inflated that number to $850 after seeing the all out marketing blitz (and all the $$ spent to produce it) and that just pushed others to talk about the 1B mark for success.

 

Antman did $520m on a $130m budget (ignoring marketing and such). Think that constitues a success (see Revats spreasheet on Revenue ratios)

Batman v Superman would need to do $1b to match its ratio, which sure it could. WBs said it will be successful at somewhere between $750 and 800m, which sounds reasonable.

 

The billion dollar number was a buzzfeed inflation, but the real number (say $800m) is the studios definition of fiscal success.

 

It could make A trillion dollars (and be a complete financial success) and I personally would not think it was a cinematic success (based on my tastes), but none of that affects how much you might like the movie, which is fine you totally get to like the movie. I totally get to not like it.

[revat]

not every movie is expected to make $1B, but in the age of superheroes now...with the two most well known superheroes in history (PLUS WONDER WOMAN), throwing in an A-level celeb, when Man of Steel did nearly $700M?? When their biggest competitor made $1B+ with an average movie (AOU)?

 

Its about expectations this movie was their biggest and best bullet, and they wounded but didn't get the kill. If Zack Snyder came in and said, I'm going to make a dark, heavy movie which critics will hate and will be a solid double for your future franchise, do you think that would have been good enough for the execs? When you're doing Batman v Superman with the first WW sighting EVER in the movies, with a zillion more movies lined up, you gotta knock some runs in.

 

Man of Steel was a bunt single.

BvS was a double, but didn't score the guy on first.

Runners on second and third is a pretty solid place to be, but it didn't affect the scoreboard.

 

And Marvel will get their chance to go 'hero v hero' coming up next, and they can do a LOT of damage to DC if they do it better (which I expect them to). People's wives and girlfriends and children can only tolerate so many superhero movies in given year, and I would guess most of them are more excited about Ant-Man 2, GOTG 2, and Avengers 3 than they are about Justice League or Aquaman or Cyborg or Flash, though I'd think many are excited about Wonder Woman.

 

Avengers = Justice League

 

I wouldn't assume going from Man of Steel to Batman v Superman in this new DCU is that jump that takes the film to a $1 B candidate. Marvel 5 movies before it went to Avengers.

 

- Iron Man

- The Incredible Hulk

- Iron Man 2

- Thor

- Captain America: The First Avenger

 

Why are we assuming the jump for DC/Warner should be Man of Steel to Batman v Superman = $1 B?

 

This is a different world with far bigger international expectations. And Ben Affleck is a far bigger celeb than anyone in the Marvel movies (even RDJ pre-Iron Man). And Marvel studios was still learning to make movies before Avengers. Not to mention that Batman and Superman have been well known names worldwide since the 1940's (30's?). None of the Marvel properties were that well known ahead of the movies (on such a worldwide scale), other than maybe spiderman.

 

I see where you're coming from, but I view your point as more of a devil's advocate position at this time, which is reasonable, but I don't think has a high probability of being true. The Avengers had to do it that way, because by and large the world didn't know who the Avengers were. BUT EVERYONE knows who Batman and Superman are, and I think DC/WB expected to get $1B in this environment. And they're probably not happy that Disney (owner of Marvel) is absolutely TROUNCING them with Zootopia, and I think will absolutely TROUNCE them with Civil War.

 

I think they could have done a standalone batman movie first so we can learn about him and his motivations (maybe robin can die?), and then we could have edited this one way better, as it was clear they were trying to pack too much in.