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

[Bosco685]

1-Batman appearance

2-WW

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

 

Batman V Superman

China Opening: 3/25/16

As of 3/27 Total: $57,062,935

 

Ant-Man

China Opening: 10/16/15

As of 11/8/15: $105,370,038 (4 weeks)

 

Is it okay if we give BvS's China numbers at least a week compared to Ant-Man's 4?

 

[Captain_Pike]

1-Batman appearance

2-WW

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

 

Batman V Superman

China Opening: 3/25/16

As of 3/27 Total: $57,062,935

 

Ant-Man

China Opening: 10/16/15

As of 11/8/15: $105,370,038 (4 weeks)

 

Is it okay if we give BvS's China numbers at least a week compared to Ant-Man's 4?

 

 

There's four new movies opening in China this week & BvS will get smashed!

[rjrjr]

 

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.

 

And this is why DC will never win. Apparently they have the best selling comics (they are not) and the best actors in their movies (they don't.) How could they not have the highest grossing movies too?

 

 

Oh, wait...

Edited April 4, 2016 by rjrjr

[rjrjr]

1-Batman appearance

2-WW

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

 

Batman V Superman

China Opening: 3/25/16

As of 3/27 Total: $57,062,935

 

Ant-Man

China Opening: 10/16/15

As of 11/8/15: $105,370,038 (4 weeks)

 

Is it okay if we give BvS's China numbers at least a week compared to Ant-Man's 4?

 

 

Crazy, isn't it?

 

I don't think Batman v. Superman can make the money. I'm not sure it is playing in China still, is it? I thought I read it was pulled after 1 week, not because of revenue (which is pretty good) but because of a slew of domestic movies that came out.

[Bosco685]

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.

 

I definitely have been categorized as a soft heart when it comes to comic book movies and TV shows. Although there are more than a few I never need to go back and watch them again. But if you look at the run of Superman and Batman movies, there have been many missteps that wipes out the goodness from time to time.

 

Especially with Superman, which after the second movie became a dash for cash without much story. And with DC/Warner really not having a focus on a combined cinematic universe like Marvel masterfully delivered, there have been many steps forward - many steps back. Superman III, Superman IV, Superman Returns - after a while the general audience will assume not to trust these films. Only the Nolan trilogy made up for much of this - but that was Batman and his associated universe. Which then was dismissed with the new DCCU.

 

Man of Steel is its first real film, which went down a much better path. But it had Zack Snyder adding twists to the off again-on again Superman history adding more twists. This only led to more disruption for those that picture their Superman as Captain Pure Bread. So now it is a mixed bag what viewers should think.

 

From all that, the assumption wouldn't be 'BOOYAH Billion Dollars" to me. It is the DCCU having to gain ground leading up to Justice League. Shame on Warner for not picking up on linking all these movies into a grander universe. But it got the message, and is taking its own approach to get there.

[Captain_Pike]

1-Batman appearance

2-WW

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

 

Batman V Superman

China Opening: 3/25/16

As of 3/27 Total: $57,062,935

 

Ant-Man

China Opening: 10/16/15

As of 11/8/15: $105,370,038 (4 weeks)

 

Is it okay if we give BvS's China numbers at least a week compared to Ant-Man's 4?

 

 

Crazy, isn't it?

 

I don't think Batman v. Superman can make the money. I'm not sure it is playing in China still, is it? I thought I read it was pulled after 1 week, not because of revenue (which is pretty good) but because of a slew of domestic movies that came out.

 

BvS estimate total in China (as of Monday) = $574 million yuan ($88 million USD?)

[paperheart]

1-Batman appearance

2-WW

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

 

Batman V Superman

China Opening: 3/25/16

As of 3/27 Total: $57,062,935

 

Ant-Man

China Opening: 10/16/15

As of 11/8/15: $105,370,038 (4 weeks)

 

Is it okay if we give BvS's China numbers at least a week compared to Ant-Man's 4?

 

 

There's four new movies opening in China this week & BvS will get smashed!

 

already happened. BvS was 4th in China this past weekend w/ $12MM. it's for all intents and purposes done there.

[Bosco685]

1-Batman appearance

2-WW

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

 

Batman V Superman

China Opening: 3/25/16

As of 3/27 Total: $57,062,935

 

Ant-Man

China Opening: 10/16/15

As of 11/8/15: $105,370,038 (4 weeks)

 

Is it okay if we give BvS's China numbers at least a week compared to Ant-Man's 4?

 

 

Crazy, isn't it?

 

I don't think Batman v. Superman can make the money. I'm not sure it is playing in China still, is it? I thought I read it was pulled after 1 week, not because of revenue (which is pretty good) but because of a slew of domestic movies that came out.

 

BvS estimate total in China (as of Monday) = $574 million yuan ($88 million USD?)

 

So the original $57 MM you noted was actually $88 MM? Good to know. Box Office Mojo hasn't updated its International numbers across the board yet.

[kdoginohio]

Was that the Flash that "visited" Bruce during the de-encryption/Batcave scene, or Orion, or Scott Free, or someone else?

[Bosco685]

Based on weekend estimates, Batman v Superman has now passed Man of Steel's Worldwide Box Office (adjusted for 2016 USD).

 

 

Weekend box office results final numbers have been posted. Turns out the estimate was low by $50,254. Nice to see it more on the positive side than last weekend's adjustment down by a few million.

 

 

[40sJohn]

Interesting conversation in this thread about what constitutes a success. Seems to me based on the financials so far, it is a success but has left, I think, a lot on the table. If this movie had gotten a 80%+ in favorable reviews, I think it would blow out 1B without a sweat.

 

Fact is this movie had a huge opening week due to it being a superhero movie with two of the biggest comic characters of all time. The superhero genre is still a draw to a lot of people that want to see big action on the big screen. I would argue that Marvel's success with the Avengers and the solo characters set the table for BvS to make it big. Add in the success of the prior Batman movies and this movie had $1B written all over it, with a shot at $1.5B or higher if it appealed to more people. However, this movie is dark and is better received by a smaller audience than the general public. The general public, likes a more upbeat, bam-pow type of movie than what Zack Snyder gave us. This is a well acted, big budge,t thoughtful movie. It held my interest with no problem, but I left feeling empty, almost numb. That is what hurt this movie with the critics and will hurt it's chancing of being one of the biggest blockbusters of all time.

 

So is it a success? Yeah, I would say so. However, I don't think Snyder can turn out a similarly paced, dark sequel and have it make these numbers.

[drotto]

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?

[Bosco685]

People are not comparing apples to apples here when they are trying to put BvS up against earlier Marvel movies.

 

The budget for Avengers was about 100 mil lower than BvS (marketing and production budget).

 

Avengers Production budget (2012): $220 MM

Avengers Production budget (2016): $227.2 MM

 

Batman v Superman budget (2016): $250 MM

 

What was that about comparing apples to pineapples again, or something with a $100 MM difference?

 

[Bosco685]

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?

 

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.

[drotto]

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?

 

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.

[Bosco685]

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.

 

Although I didn't leave The Incredible Hulk with a feeling of excitement, and was disappointed with the pace of the story of Captain America: The First Avenger (but Chris Evans is THE best choice for the role), the other movies definitely got me motivated.

 

Wonder Woman has all the signs of being a hit. And with Aquaman and Cyborg, I have a feeling they will bring in new fans. Green Lantern could be a huge hit since they are going for the Green Lantern Corps - but please give us a solid story and acting. And now that there is even more talk of a solo Batman movie, add that to the list. The Flash could go either way, as it is going to be confusing for fans of the TV with no awareness of alternate universes other than the show explanations (which Supergirl also made sure to drive home).

[Gatsby77]

Here's why the $1 billion benchmark for Batman v. Superman is real.

 

It's not just that it's a superhero movie with two of the most iconic superheroes ever -- it's a modern summer blockbuster.

 

And we've live in an age where those should gross $1 bn. worldwide (with the Imax inflation & incredibly more international screens just 7-8 years ago).

 

Furious 7 did $1.5 bn.

Jurassic World did $1.67 bn.

Pirates of the Caribbean 2 did $1 bn. 10 years ago

Heck - people _hated_ Pirates of the Caribbean 4 and it did $1 bn. 5 years ago

 

In the age of the modern blockbuster (esp. sequel, which this is -- to Man of Steel), $1 bn. for a summer tentpole is no longer an unreasonable benchmark.

 

Amazing Spider-Man 2, meanwhile, only did $757 million worldwide and was considered such a failure that they cancelled the planned sequel and two spin-offs in favor of a reboot.

 

You can argue a $750 million vs. $800 million bar for break-even all you want, it's still hard to spin that after the Nolan movies, etc. Batman v. Superman can't even match Iron Man III's numbers without even adjusting for inflation.

[Gatsby77]

PS: with the final second weekend numbers in, BvS dropped 69.1% from its first weekend, against no other major new releases.

 

That's a harder fall than last year's FF, which only dropped 68.2% in its second weekend.

[Bosco685]

Amazing Spider-Man 2, meanwhile, only did $757 million worldwide and was considered such a failure that they cancelled the planned sequel and two spin-offs in favor of a reboot.

 

$708 MM Worldwide ($709.5 MM when adjusted for inflation). So it was worse than you noted.

 

P.S. You're welcome.

 

 

You can argue a $750 million vs. $800 million bar for break-even all you want, it's still hard to spin that after the Nolan movies, etc. Batman v. Superman can't even match Iron Man III's numbers without even adjusting for inflation.

 

Iron Man III had quite the buildup before it came on the scene, with a tightly knit universe that kept film-goers wanting to see where this ride took them. But before Avengers, the previous movies were all sub-$1 Billion. The build-up had created that new standard for the future Marvel movies.

 

[chezmtghut]

 

Iron Man III had quite the buildup before it came on the scene, with a tightly knit universe that kept film-goers wanting to see where this ride took them. But before Avengers, the previous movies were all sub-$1 Billion. The build-up had created that new standard for the future Marvel movies.

 

 

That's a good point but you also have to consider that Batman & Superman aren't new to the big screen either. Both characters have had many films to build a fan base outside of the comic world. Maybe the films were rebooted but that shouldn't effect the fan base. When Spider-Man was reboot, all the fans of the original series were waiting for the new films, so there was nothing to really build up to in that sense.