THE BATMAN starring Robert Pattinson (2022) 13 13

[eastriver400]

All I could say is I loved it, I’m looking forward to rewatching it on HBOMAX, I’m looking forward to a sequel, and I am ecstatic to see what Reeves does with the Arkham TV show.

 

[Bosco685]

On 3/29/2022 at 5:47 PM, eastriver31400 said:

All I could say is I loved it, I’m looking forward to rewatching it on HBOMAX, I’m looking forward to a sequel, and I am ecstatic to see what Reeves does with the Arkham TV show.

What does that have to do with how Suicide Squad and Josstice League did in 2016??

[Jaydogrules]

On 3/29/2022 at 2:32 PM, Gatsby77 said:

The New York Times cites $150 million: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/movies/making-suicide-squad-a-smash-despite-withering-reviews.html

Deadline cites $156 million: 

No Time to Die is not a relevant comp because of the significant studio delays and interest carry costs. Depending on the source, somewhere between $50 million - $66 million in marketing costs were purely wasted because they were spent against the April 2020 release date - and the film didn't end up in theaters until late 2021.

The Batman didn't see anything close to those delays - just a shutdown of a week or two when Robert Pattison reportedly got covid.

The point?

We'll eventually have an accurate ballpark accounting of The Batman's P+A costs.

But right now your guesses are just .

So you think that a movie released 6 years ago to a smaller global audience had the same P&A as this movie ?  

-J.

[Bosco685]

On 3/29/2022 at 6:33 PM, Jaydogrules said:

So you think that a movie released 6 years ago to a smaller global audience had the same P&A as this movie ?  

-J.

[Gatsby77]

On 3/29/2022 at 6:33 PM, Jaydogrules said:

So you think that a movie released 6 years ago to a smaller global audience had the same P&A as this movie ?  

-J.

In a word - yes.

But...let me elaborate anyway.

• $150 million is still a *ton* to spend on P&A - especially for a film that was originally budgeted at just $100 million total.
• Avengers: Endgame had only $150 million global P&A - and that was not only a much bigger film - but costs have gone *down* since then as digital advertising has largely supplanted traditional TV advertising
• Due to the pandemic, we're looking at drastically diminished out-of-home (billboards, bus signage, etc.)
• The Suicide Squad was a new property - unknown to non-comic collectors. So it *needed* a huge marketing push in the way the 10th Batman film (and 4th Batman film appearance in 7 years) did not. Everyone knows who Batman is, so the marketing isn't a heavy lift.

[Jaydogrules]

On 3/30/2022 at 6:25 AM, Gatsby77 said:

In a word - yes.

But...let me elaborate anyway.

• $150 million is still a *ton* to spend on P&A - especially for a film that was originally budgeted at just $100 million total.
• Avengers: Endgame had only $150 million global P&A - and that was not only a much bigger film - but costs have gone *down* since then as digital advertising has largely supplanted traditional TV advertising
• Due to the pandemic, we're looking at drastically diminished out-of-home (billboards, bus signage, etc.)
• The Suicide Squad was a new property - unknown to non-comic collectors. So it *needed* a huge marketing push in the way the 10th Batman film (and 4th Batman film appearance in 7 years) did not. Everyone knows who Batman is, so the marketing isn't a heavy lift.

I'll have to disagree with most of that.  Both F9 and Bond are also known worldwide and both had $200MM+ worldwide P&A expenses anyway, and like this , both also got China.    There is absolutely ZERO chance Warner spent less than that trying to hawk this reboot.  The distribution in China alone (something suicide squad didn't have to do) added multiple millions.  I won't even get into how you previously claimed suicide squad also had Batman, Joker, HQ, will smith as worldwide previously known marketing  commodities, yet now you're claiming all those things needed to be "freshly" marketed to the world.(except China, pf course)  with a big P&A.

Anyway , interesting chat.  Thank you for keeping it classy.  

-J.

[DiamondCityComics]

Edited March 30, 2022 by DiamondCityComics

[William-James88]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:19 PM, Chicago Boy said:

IMO it could arguably be the biggest Marvel book of all time across any age.

I legit see it as the true marvel grail, regardless which Marvel book may be worth more. 

On 3/29/2022 at 10:28 AM, Jaydogrules said:

I'm not "upset" it didn't do better.  I'm disappointed it didn't.  I think a lot of people just don't like the casting.  I certainly do not.  Batman's popularity is just fine, but Warner has certainly tainted the brand in the movies of late. 

But if you don't like the casting, and believe that's the reason, then why the disappointment? Wouldn't that validate your assessment of the situation?

For instance, I am a transformers fan and absolutely hate the Michael Bay films. But they were making billions, one after the other. I was just hoping that the other shoe would drop one day and these films would be seen as the naked emperors they are. Well, finally the Last Knight was just too garbage of a film for even China to care and it lost over a hundred million dollars. While it's a franchise I care for, I was glad the film failed and not dissapointed since it made the studio rethink what to do with the franchise. And the next film we got was my personal favourite of the bunch. 

Edited March 31, 2022 by William-James88

[William-James88]

On 3/29/2022 at 5:05 PM, Jaydogrules said:

I read suicide squad's was closer to 125 million than 150.  

I haven't seen batman's but if it was less than 200 million I would be surprised., using no time to die and F9 as recent  "Corona" comps that also got full worldwide releases (suicide squad did not, and it was 6 years ago).

-J.

Didn't No Time to Die's P&A costs baloon since it had to do 2 seperate rounds of P&A years apart? If we are going to use No Time do Die as a fair comparative estimate, it's figure should be cut in half.

[Bosco685]

 

[Gatsby77]

On 3/31/2022 at 12:20 AM, William-James88 said:

Didn't No Time to Die's P&A costs baloon since it had to do 2 seperate rounds of P&A years apart? If we are going to use No Time do Die as a fair comparative estimate, it's figure should be cut in half.

Exactly. It's not a close comp to virtually any other film released since the pandemic (although...Top Gun: Maverick may be close due to the similar multiple marketing pushes over several years).

In addition, No Time to Die had at least $20 million in interest carry costs from the nearly 2-year delay.

[Gatsby77]

On 3/31/2022 at 3:46 AM, Bosco685 said:

 

But didn't you hear?

Aquaman lost money theatrically 

[Jaydogrules]

On 3/30/2022 at 9:20 PM, William-James88 said:

Didn't No Time to Die's P&A costs baloon since it had to do 2 seperate rounds of P&A years apart? If we are going to use No Time do Die as a fair comparative estimate, it's figure should be cut in half.

No, it did not.  No Time to Die did not do a full promotional push prior to "corona", not even close, and certainly did not release prints worldwide. Also, it's full P&A was actually closer to $250MM, F9 was about $200MM, and there was no "double dipping" at all there.  

So like I said, Batman was also about $200MM, at least , which , incidentally, is also what Warner spent on Aquaman four years ago, and , evidently, "only" $50MM more than suicide squad, which was released 6 years ago, and not even  worldwide  like Batman, aquaman, no time to die, F9, etc all were. 

-J.

Edited March 31, 2022 by Jaydogrules

[Bosco685]

 

[William-James88]

On 3/31/2022 at 12:31 PM, Bosco685 said:

 

Lol, kinda funny to have a Bat film with Robert Pattison face off against a Vampire film with Jared Leto.

[Bosco685]

 

[Boozad]

I'll never dismiss any of Nolan's work on the Dark Knight trilogy, it was immense, but this... I could have happily gone straight back in and watched it again. It completely blew me away.

I made the same mistake with the casting of Pattinson as I did with Ledger as The Joker, expected the worst but loved what I saw. I'll be glued to any follow up/spin off of this and I must have watched the deleted scene a hundred times by now, The Joker has always been my favourite villain by a country mile and Keoghan's version in that five minutes was absolutely perfect.

[Bosco685]

On 4/2/2022 at 6:24 AM, Boozad said:

I'll never dismiss any of Nolan's work on the Dark Knight trilogy, it was immense, but this... I could have happily gone straight back in and watched it again. It completely blew me away.

I made the same mistake with the casting of Pattinson as I did with Ledger as The Joker, expected the worst but loved what I saw. I'll be glued to any follow up/spin off of this and I must have watched the deleted scene a hundred times by now, The Joker has always been my favourite villain by a country mile and Keoghan's version in that five minutes was absolutely perfect.

Whoa! A good blast from the past. 

Glad you enjoyed it, Gav.

[Larryw7]

On 4/2/2022 at 6:24 AM, Boozad said:

I'll never dismiss any of Nolan's work on the Dark Knight trilogy, it was immense, but this... I could have happily gone straight back in and watched it again. It completely blew me away.

I made the same mistake with the casting of Pattinson as I did with Ledger as The Joker, expected the worst but loved what I saw. I'll be glued to any follow up/spin off of this and I must have watched the deleted scene a hundred times by now, The Joker has always been my favourite villain by a country mile and Keoghan's version in that five minutes was absolutely perfect.

Welcome back!

[Bosco685]