THE BATMAN starring Robert Pattinson (2022) 13 13

[Gatsby77]

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.  As I have said repeatedly, I never expected this to do spider-man business.  But failing to even come close to other Batman movies that came out 10+ years ago, and barely matching suicide squad from 6 years ago with such a HUGE production and marketing budget, and a release schedule that covered the entire Earth is just plain ridiculous, despite what some of these people posting here keep trying to convince themselves of.  

-J.

Curious why you keep citing the Nolan films as the standard ("Batman movies that came out 10+ years ago") but ignore BvS - which came out far more recently.

Putting aside that BvS had far more anticipation - and starred Batman AND Superman, The Batman has already surpassed BvS's domestic total - and cost 20% less to make -- so it will easily match its revenue ratio.

And - I'll say it again, but Suicide Squad had not only more anticipation - but featured Batman, The Joker, Harley Quinn and Will Smith -- and The Batman's outperforming it pound-for-pound.

Edited March 29, 2022 by Gatsby77

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 3/29/2022 at 10:21 AM, Axelrod said:

I think it's kind of amusing that the very article you have linked here seems to be speaking directly about you:

The author is dumb if they expected BvS to make a billion dollars, though.

[Bosco685]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:39 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

The author is dumb if they expected BvS to make a billion dollars, though.

Remember. 'They expected it to make a billion'. Not sure who this THEY is that is mysteriously quoted over the years.

But they expected it, and clearly said so. Somewhere. We think. Assumed. Trust me, bro!

[Gatsby77]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:39 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

The author is dumb if they expected BvS to make a billion dollars, though.

Why?

I think the pre-release expectations for BvS were that it would indeed hit $1 bn.+

First - the perception that Man of Steel's $667 million was an under-performance led to the re-tooling.

Secondly - BvS was coming off of the two $1 bn.+ Nolan films - featured an auteur director and the first cinematic meeting of DC's biggest stars (plus Wonder Woman as a bonus).

 

What folks didn't know is that the finished product would suck donkey toes - and fall off precipitously after the first weekend due to word-of-mouth.

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:49 PM, Bosco685 said:

Remember. 'They expected it to make a billion'. Not sure who this THEY is that is mysteriously quoted over the years.

But they expected it, and clearly said so. Somewhere. We think. Assumed. Trust me, bro!

Idk who expected what, but I'll tell you this: BvS made WB money, and The Batman is making WB money.

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:50 PM, Gatsby77 said:

Why?

I think the pre-release expectations for BvS were that it would indeed hit $1 bn.+

First - the perception that Man of Steel's $667 million was an under-performance led to the re-tooling.

Secondly - BvS was coming off of the two $1 bn.+ Nolan films - featured an auteur director and the first cinematic meeting of DC's biggest stars (plus Wonder Woman as a bonus).

 

What folks didn't know is that the finished product would suck donkey toes - and fall off precipitously after the first weekend due to word-of-mouth.

Because pulling a "$1 billion" figure out of your butt as a goal is putting the cart before the horse. The MCU didn't make money until their 6th movie of the franchise; The Avengers. If you want Avengers money, you have to put in The Avengers effort: Patience with the artistic process.

The intended movie (the 3-hour cut) could have got them that $1 billion for all we know, but WB sacrificed art (runtime) for money (more potential showings), which is typically a losing effort.

[Bosco685]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:50 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Idk who expected what, but I'll tell you this: BvS made WB money, and The Batman is making WB money.

Remember...Batman has been done before. So naturally it is over-done (ignoring the Spider-Man movies that did the same).

[Bosco685]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:50 PM, Gatsby77 said:

Why?

I think the pre-release expectations for BvS were that it would indeed hit $1 bn.+

First - the perception that Man of Steel's $667 million was an under-performance led to the re-tooling.

Secondly - BvS was coming off of the two $1 bn.+ Nolan films - featured an auteur director and the first cinematic meeting of DC's biggest stars (plus Wonder Woman as a bonus).

 

What folks didn't know is that the finished product would suck donkey toes - and fall off precipitously after the first weekend due to word-of-mouth.

Dusting off the old "expectations for BvS to hit $1 b" debate theme. So 2016.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

On 3/29/2022 at 11:19 AM, Chicago Boy said:

Im just disappointed in a few books Cap 1 being one of them. It was a grail of mine for a long time which I traded a few years ago. I always thought it was undervalued even before the Marvel movies.  IMO it could arguably be the biggest Marvel book of all time across any age.  I still think it's undervalued. Incredible cover, first appearances galore, and tons of cap stories and art.

I agree. This may border on sacrilege, but I think Cap > HT + Subby. Stated another way, Cap 1 > Marvel 1.  There. I said it. Bring on the torches and pitchforks 

Edited March 29, 2022 by GreatCaesarsGhost

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:55 PM, Bosco685 said:

Remember...Batman has been done before. So naturally it is over-done (ignoring the Spider-Man movies that did the same).

I don't care if the DCEU's 2nd movie was going to be Justice League. If the studio interferes with the artistic process, they can't set baseless demands on returns.

If it was Christian Bale's Batman, referencing Nolan's trilogy might mean something, but we all know that it's not Bale's Batman.

[Jaydogrules]

On 3/29/2022 at 9:30 AM, Gatsby77 said:

Curious why you keep citing the Nolan films as the standard ("Batman movies that came out 10+ years ago") but ignore BvS - which came out far more recently.

Putting aside that BvS had far more anticipation - and starred Batman AND Superman, The Batman has already surpassed BvS's domestic total - and cost 20% less to make -- so it will easily match its revenue ratio.

And - I'll say it again, but Suicide Squad had not only more anticipation - but featured Batman, The Joker, Harley Quinn and Will Smith -- and The Batman's outperforming it pound-for-pound.

It most certainly is not.  First, SS cost less to make and market. Second, it didn't have China.  Third, it didn't have three full weeks of zero competition.  Fourth, it was critically reviled, despite who was in it (or maybe partly because of), Fifth, we won't even get into the inflation adjusted numbers.  

Maybe @Bosco685 can help us out by posting the revenue line for the first suicide squad.  

Here's betting it did better than a pathetic 3.5x.

-J.

[Gatsby77]

On 3/29/2022 at 12:49 PM, Bosco685 said:

Remember. 'They expected it to make a billion'. Not sure who this THEY is that is mysteriously quoted over the years.

But they expected it, and clearly said so. Somewhere. We think. Assumed. Trust me, bro!

Ahem! There's this Variety article, from pre-release: https://variety.com/2016/film/news/wb-batman-v-superman-faces-high-expectations-1201729887/

"One media analyst, who asked not to be named, said that given the costs and need to launch a series of future films, “anything under $1 billion in worldwide box office will be a disappointment.”

Here's a post-release Yahoo Finance article noting how it's $420 million+ global debut weekend broke all kinds of records - and kids' vacation schedules, and lack of near-term competition would continue its momentum. (This was before its 69% domestic drop in the second weekend).

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/batman-v-superman-rewrote-hollywood-170259778.html

[Bosco685]

On 3/29/2022 at 1:14 PM, Gatsby77 said:

Ahem! There's this Variety article, from pre-release: https://variety.com/2016/film/news/wb-batman-v-superman-faces-high-expectations-1201729887/

"One media analyst, who asked not to be named, said that given the costs and need to launch a series of future films, “anything under $1 billion in worldwide box office will be a disappointment.”

Here's a post-release Yahoo Finance article noting how it's $420 million+ global debut weekend broke all kinds of records - and kids' vacation schedules, and lack of near-term competition would continue its momentum. (This was before its 69% domestic drop in the second weekend).

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/batman-v-superman-rewrote-hollywood-170259778.html

A-hummmm

That was your ah-haaaaa moment?! 

[theCapraAegagrus]

Probably asked to not be named because it was a dumb expectation.

Maybe if WB didn't want Doomsday in the movie, the production team could've made a 150-minute complete film with Metallo?

[Gatsby77]

On 3/29/2022 at 1:02 PM, Jaydogrules said:

It most certainly is not.  First, SS cost less to make and market. Second, it didn't have China.  Third, it didn't have three full weeks of zero competition.  Fourth, it was critically reviled, despite who was in it (or maybe partly because of), Fifth, we won't even get into the inflation adjusted numbers.  

Maybe @Bosco685 can help us out by posting the revenue line for the first suicide squad.  

Here's betting it did better than a pathetic 3.5x.

-J.

As already noted, The Batman opened higher than Suicide Squad, held better than Suicide Squad and has already surpassed Suicide Squad's domestic total in just 3 weeks.

Also - Suicide Squad cost $175 million for production - vs. The Batman's $200 million.

$747 million global box office total divided by $175 million for production gives a 4.27x multiple.

The Batman's at $673 million globally so far vs. a $200 million production budget - giving a 3.37x multiple.

But:

1) It's not done yet; and

2) The split is different - The Batman's weighted far more heavily towards domestic dollars - which are worth more to the studio than foreign ones.

So the studio profitability paths will look similar even if The Batman only hits $750 million worldwide (i.e., a lower multiple but one more heavily weighted towards domestic receipts).

Edited March 29, 2022 by Gatsby77

[Bosco685]

Okay. Back to the movie.

GCPD has taken down the Rataala site now that Riddler is in jail. 

[Jaydogrules]

On 3/29/2022 at 10:45 AM, Gatsby77 said:

As already noted, The Batman opened higher than Suicide Squad, held better than Suicide Squad and has already surpassed Suicide Squad's domestic total in just 3 weeks.

Also - Suicide Squad cost $175 million for production - vs. The Batman's $200 million.

$747 million global box office total divided by $175 million for production gives a 4.27x multiple.

The Batman's at $673 million globally so far vs. a $200 million production budget - giving a 3.37x multiple.

But:

1) It's not done yet; and

2) The split is different - The Batman's weighted far more heavily towards domestic dollars - which are worth more to the studio than foreign ones.

So the studio profitability paths will look similar even if The Batman only hits $750 million worldwide (i.e., a lower multiple but one more heavily weighted towards domestic receipts).

I agree with everything you just said, except your final analysis, because not only was suicide squad cheaper to make it was also cheaper to market and distribute.  

But even if I agreed with your final analysis , to declare that batman is an unmitigated financial smash because it makes the same amount of "profit" (but much lower multiple), as one of the worst movies ever made six years ago is....

Meh.

-J.

Edited March 29, 2022 by Jaydogrules

[Gatsby77]

On 3/29/2022 at 4:36 PM, Jaydogrules said:

I agree with everything you just said, except your final analysis, because not only was suicide squad cheaper to make it was also cheaper to market and distribute.  

But even if I agreed with your final analysis , to declare that batman is an unmitigated financial smash because it makes the same amount of "profit" (but much lower multiple), as one of the worst movies ever made six years ago is....

Meh.

-J.

What's your source for The Batman's larger marketing / distribution budget?

Suicide Squad's reported marketing + promotion budget was $150 million.

Have you seen reputable reporting on The Batman's yet (i.e., from Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, etc.?)

Do you seriously think it's significantly higher than $150 million?

Edited March 29, 2022 by Gatsby77

[Jaydogrules]

On 3/29/2022 at 1:55 PM, Gatsby77 said:

What's your source for The Batman's larger marketing / distribution budget?

Suicide Squad's reported marketing + promotion budget was $150 million.

Have you seen reputable reporting on The Batman's yet (i.e., from Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, etc.?)

Do you seriously think it's significantly higher than $150 million?

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.

[Gatsby77]

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.

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: https://issuu.com/pmcderek/docs/no_10_suicide_squad

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 .