Batman V Superman’ Takes A Dive With -70% Second Weekend

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothing right now, but we usually get studio estimates starting around 10am (and rougher estimates before that) and the new thread doesnt go up until 12:30-1pm most weeks.

I also dont think most people in this thread are here to discuss box office numbers.

Well, like Master Wayne says, the world only makes sense when you force it to. Might as well just post 'em in here until Xaosslug posts the new thread. The majority of the conversation about those early estimates is going to be centered on BvS anyway, so it'll be more or less on topic. The thread title is an estimate: Updated Saturday numbers are going to speak directly to that, and should make for more informed conversation. Hard to say that's not on-topic.

Or maybe a mod will be like "huh, maybe we shouldn't have locked that, we'll just unlock it and tell the photoshopping dipshits to chill the fuck out and stick to B.O. related discussion."

Anyway - speaking of the thread title: Does it end up being good news if the actuals come in on Monday and the movie only dropped 69%
 
Cap is really one of the best done in MCU. Except I don't care about him and Peggy.

And I don't care about him and his friendship with Bucky.

besides that he was good in TWS and AOU I guess.

I dunno man, that was one of the roughest parts of winter soldier for me.
 
You're full of shit. Sorry.

Anyone who admits to liking Iron Man 3 with its ass pull of a Mandarin and later claims any sort of authority on 1) comic books, 2) movies, or 3) the crossing of genres, is full of shit.

I'm usually all for faithfulness, but that was almost better if you knew the material.
 

giphy.gif

DP?

What about when Tony Stark went through a hole in space and then blacked out believing he was about to die which consequently led to PTSD being a recurring issue over two separate movies? Or Cap accepting death over fighting his friend in a movie that deals heavily with survivor's guilt? Or Rocket wailing like a baby because he thought Groot just died? Or Thor standing up to the Destroyer knowing he'd be surely killed? Ya know, most MCU films deal directly with the hero confronting their own mortality when you stop to think about it.

Well said. I'm starting to think Marvel gets a bum rap around here.

The films change a lot about Thor to be fair. Some of the Donald Blake stuff would actually work great in the films and mitigate a lot of their problems.

Actually, I'm still waiting for them to go all crazy Asgard stuff like Walt Simonson and Jason Aaron did.
 
Cap is really one of the best done in MCU. Except I don't care about him and Peggy.

And I don't care about him and his friendship with Bucky.

besides that he was good in TWS and AOU I guess.


They really didn't set their friendship up well enough in the first Captain America film.
 
Society just doesn't understand and appreciate the dark, brooding complexity of famed director Zack Snyder's work.

Real talk though, this 100% confirms WB's fears in the leaked documents a few months back.
 
I'm usually all for faithfulness, but that was almost better if you knew the material.

It was definitely better.

I still don't get the schism among some of the bigger film fans here regarding Iron Man 3. Most of the people who think it's a terrible movie unabashedly praise almost everything else Shane Black's ever had his hands on. This goodwill extends all the way to fucking MONSTER SQUAD.

Yet all that goodwill is willing to get chucked to the side, despite the fact Iron Man 3 is pretty much 100% Shane Black through and through, because the Mandarin isn't used like he was in the comics. And the Mandarin in the comics isn't all that fucking great to begin with. What Black did with him is the best thing that's ever happened to him.
 
Superman/Cap comparison is way off. Captain America is literally your granddad. Like a pumped up Jimmy Stewart. It makes sense for him to be the ultimate boy scout, naive and good hearted and salt of the earth.

People want to reduce Superman to that, and it's lame. There's so much more there. There are so many regular joe nice guy heroes, do we really need another one. It'd be different if they saw the character like Grant Morrison in All-Star Superman, where the benevolence comes from this really interesting place because of his Godlike powers and there are all these other aspects, but no, people just want the grown up farm boy. Boring.
 
Really?

I'd say Thor and Superman share a lot. Red capes..mother knows they're friends Both sent to Earth by their father His parents are alive, and it's all COMPLETELY different circumstances, both Gods on a planet of humans Eh.., both consider Earth their home planet, both bond with the first Earth women they encounter gross..he doesn't fall for a Martha equivalent, and both believe in the good of humanity despite every possible logic yet the natural ever cocky brute has more faith in humanity from jump

Yeah. I fucking HATE both Thor movies..please stop. I feel dirty as all hell defending any of those turds. Thor was created from one of Superman's soggy shit stained red britches. The fact that y'all compare him so directly is..I'll just leave it at terrible..
 
I think it's time to ask ourselves why Superman works better in trailers than movies.

Love Supes, but there's something about him that doesn't translate to movies.

The only part of his movies where Snyder actually presents the real Superman is in the trailers. That's why.

Look at Man of Steel. The trailer is built around Jor-El giving him a speech about what Superman means. That he is the best of our nature. That he is a heightened ideal to strive toward. He literally says that. "You will give the people of earth an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you. They will stumble, they will fall, but in time they will join you in the sun." Even the speech understands that Superman belongs in the sun! That he is lightness and good.

Cut to Snyder's portrayal of him in the films as a sulky, grumbling asshole.

The man loves to have his characters say one thing and then have everything about his film and its aesthetic choices say exactly the opposite.

See, I love that twist. Problem is after that twist is another hour odd of film and the actual villain just isn't that interesting.

Well, yeah. The least interesting part of the film is the obligatory culminating fight sequence that every superhero film is basically required to have, but Pepper and Rhodey elevate that shit.
 
It was definitely better.

I still don't get the schism among some of the bigger film fans here regarding Iron Man 3. Most of the people who think it's a terrible movie unabashedly praise almost everything else Shane Black's ever had his hands on. This goodwill extends all the way to fucking MONSTER SQUAD.

Yet all that goodwill is willing to get chucked to the side, despite the fact Iron Man 3 is pretty much 100% Shane Black through and through, because the Mandarin isn't used like he was in the comics. And the Mandarin in the comics isn't all that fucking great to begin with. What Black did with him is the best thing that's ever happened to him.

See, I love that twist. Problem is after that twist is another hour odd of film and the actual villain just isn't that interesting.
 
It was definitely better.

I still don't get the schism among some of the bigger film fans here regarding Iron Man 3. Most of the people who think it's a terrible movie unabashedly praise almost everything else Shane Black's ever had his hands on. This goodwill extends all the way to fucking MONSTER SQUAD.

Yet all that goodwill is willing to get chucked to the side, despite the fact Iron Man 3 is pretty much 100% Shane Black through and through, because the Mandarin isn't used like he was in the comics. And the Mandarin in the comics isn't all that fucking great to begin with. What Black did with him is the best thing that's ever happened to him.

I mostly agree but I fuck with that one annual where he makes a propaganda movie and tries to retcon his own origin.
 
Not surprised by this, the movie is a complete mess from start to finish. The hype has subsided and reality is kicking in.
 
Superman/Cap comparison is way off. Captain America is literally your granddad. Like a pumped up Jimmy Stewart. It makes sense for him to be the ultimate boy scout, naive and good hearted and salt of the earth.

People want to reduce Superman to that, and it's lame. There's so much more there. There are so many regular joe nice guy heroes, do we really need another one. It'd be different if they saw the character like Grant Morrison in All-Star Superman, where's the benevolence comes from this really interesting place because of his Godlike powers and there are all these other aspects, but no, people just want the grown up farm boy. Boring.

its not that. it's that both of those two represent an idealized America of the 1940s/50s.
At one point just about every hero did, but eventually they all moved on from this in one way or another.

Cap is permanently tied to this era due to his origin, Superman because of his character. Even in modern settings both of these two struggle with reconciling the ideal of what America or mankind "should" be, with what it actually is.

Those two remain symbols in both their respective universes/franchises of what other heroes aspire to be, regardless of how powerful they are. You can't really say this about Thor.
 
Saw it. GAF reviews gave me a heads up, so I went in with low expectations.

*Editing- very sloppy in places. You can feel that there are parts missing (see below). The dream sequences didn't feel like dreams

*Lex- I can buy into dower Superman and pushed over the edge Bats, but who the hell was that? I mentally had to make him the son of "Clancey Brown" Lex in order to accept his role in the movie. There's bending characters, and then there is this- scraping the personality completely.

*Lois/spear plot- Frustratingly stupid. I assume what every makes this works is on the cutting room floor, but it is still stupid because of ....

*Superman/Lois I'm in danger mental connection- Yes, Superman is known for saving Lois, but there isn't even comic book logic to explain the three times he comes to her rescue in this film.

*Location?- Metropolis is just across the harbor from Gotham? Would it not have been simpler to just have Bats work from a Wayne satellite building in Metropolis?

*Missing Lex scene- Not going to describe it for spoilers, but yeah, it should have been in the theatrical cut. Sure, you can piece things together without it, but it would have helped tie up Lex's story in this movie.

Dreams and JLA- "The Knightmare/Flash" didn't bother me, except for the cut of Bruce looking at a screen, to bam, we're in the Knightmare. WW looking at the files should have stopped after her picture. Just leave the logos there as Easter eggs. Truthfully, both could have save for an extended edition. Bats and WW a;read had enough motive in the film without those.

Enough for now. I did find amusement in this film despite how sloppy it was. I really did like Batfleck. WW is good, but sorely underused. I don't blame the actor, but Sups is just poorly written- too much gloom. Lex's plot/motive wasn't horrible for a superhero story, but it just wasn't Lex.
 
Superman/Cap comparison is way off. Captain America is literally your granddad. Like a pumped up Jimmy Stewart. It makes sense for him to be the ultimate boy scout, naive and good hearted and salt of the earth.

People want to reduce Superman to that, and it's lame. There's so much more there. There are so many regular joe nice guy heroes, do we really need another one. It'd be different if they saw the character like Grant Morrison in All-Star Superman, where the benevolence comes from this really interesting place because of his Godlike powers and there are all these other aspects, but no, people just want the grown up farm boy. Boring.
Wai...wait. You've never heard of Superman being referred to as a 'boy scout'? Even by his own teammates? Batman almost never passes on an opportunity to tell him to his face. Supes and Cap are two of THE biggest boy scouts in comics.
 
Yeah. I fucking HATE both Thor movies..please stop. I feel dirty as all hell defending any of those turds. Thor was created from one of Superman's soggy shit stained red britches. The fact that y'all compare him so directly is..I'll just leave it at terrible..

And the fact people go 'Cap is what Superman should be' just tells me they have no idea who Superman is. Shit, Cap admits he did fucked up stuff in the war solely so other people wouldn't have to. If you dislike MOS Superman for killing Zod, how'd you possibly think MCU Cap is a good example of what a Superman should be?
 
Actually, I'm still waiting for them to go all crazy Asgard stuff like Walt Simonson and Jason Aaron did.

At least Marvel recognizes when stuff doesn't work. They know Thor is their weakest franchise and have described wanting Ragnarok to do for Thor what Winter Soldier did for Cap. They knew they stifled Favreau while making Iron Man 2 so they let Shane Black make a Shane Black movie that's deliberately very detached from the rest of the MCU. They realized people didn't like the Mandarin twist so they made the All Hail the King one-shot to keep the possibility of a more traditional take of the Mandarin alive. They knew the big blockbuster third act battle was getting tiresome so Ant-Man's finale is decidedly small scale. After AoU failed to beat Avengers, Feige was able to dissolve the oversight committee and we're getting a set of Russo driven Avengers movie.

Marvel respects their fans a whole lot more than DC, imo. They take criticisms to heart and try to fine tweak what works and what doesn't instead of denying there are any problems at all.
 
its not that. it's that both of those two represent an idealized America of the 1940s/50s.
At one point just about every hero did, but eventually they all moved on from this in one way or another.

Cap is permanently tied to this era due to his origin, Superman because of his character. Even in modern settings both of these two struggle with reconciling the ideal of what America or mankind "should" be, with what it actually is.

Those two remain symbols in both their respective universes/franchises of what other heroes aspire to be, regardless of how powerful they are. You can't really say this about Thor.

I really don't want square jawed Superman stuck in the 40s. That's cool if you do, I get the appeal to a certain extent, but yeah, not interesting to me.

I wouldn't really compare Superman with Thor either, though.
 
the worst thing about Iron Man 3 is Tony's "I got nothing" to seeing Pepper alive. An example of when a funny quip wasn't at all appropriate.
 
You will give the people of Earth an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you, they will stumble, they will fall. But in time, they will join you in the sun, Zack. In time, you will help them accomplish wonders.

Speaking of, it's time that Nolan/Snyder stop inserting this kind of inspirational BS dialogue. So fucking pretentious and eye-roll worthy. I couldn't stand the "He's not the hero that we need but the villain ??" line either.
 
Finally saw this today, meant to last weekend but stuff came up.

I'm not sure if the movie is too long or too short, but either way it's the editors/directors fault. Can't help but feel like you could cut a fair bit out for a tighter movie or add a fair bit more and it'd make more sense. Anxious for the 3hr cut now.

Affleck was a fantastic Batman though. I thought he portrayed an older, more weary Batman really well. I could have watched a 2.5 hour movie with just him easy.
 
I do kinda feel like if you did a live-action DCU but made it a period piece, you'd be off to a decent start.

Build your way up to the New Frontier, even.
 
What's great about Iron Man 3 is how it trolls the shit out of every superhero movie that overrelies on 9/11 imagery by having its entire point be "lol get over 9/11 already." Probably the most ideologically correct superhero film ever made.
 
Wai...wait. You've never heard of Superman being referred to as a 'boy scout'? Even by his own teammates? Batman almost never passes on an opportunity to tell him to his face. Supes and Cap are two of THE biggest boy scouts in comics.

That version of Superman definitely exists. But I appreciate attempts to move away from it.
 
People wanting this movie to fail so WB reboots are delusional. If they don't make a profit on these movies they are shutting things down. If WB doesn't do it their stockholders will.

It looks like they will make money on this though. I know everyone was expecting 1 billion but the budget for the movie is 250 million. I don't how much more they spent on advertising and all but usually making 3 times the budget is considered good . Hitting 800 -900 will be decent for this film and enough to keep WB in the game. Marvel wasn't hitting a billion when starting their universe and WB is expected to because of the characters alone. Its still a negative start to a universe so SS and WW have to turn the ship around or at best you're getting stand alone movies and the connected universe is scrapped. At worst they will just drop everything.
 
I do kinda feel like if you did a live-action DCU but made it a period piece, you'd be off to a decent start.

Build your way up to the New Frontier, even.

They should just go fuckin nuts and excuse away this movie as some parallel timeline where all the characters are idiots. Then go even more nuts and do a Batman RIP movie and Final Crisis
 
I do kinda feel like if you did a live-action DCU but made it a period piece, you'd be off to a decent start.

Build your way up to the New Frontier, even.

Setting it in the '30s/'40s would certainly be a better way of differentiating from Marvel than what Snyder is doing. Or you could even just do the Batman:TAS thing of aping that period aesthetic while technically still being set in modern times.
 
I really don't want square jawed Superman stuck in the 40s. That's cool if you do, I get the appeal to a certain extent, but yeah, not interesting to me.

I wouldn't really compare Superman with Thor either, though.

you misunderstand me. I said he represents an ideal, not that he's actually stuck in the 40s.
The actual 40s/50s were much different- America never was that, but its a pleasant fiction.

Superman/Clark Kent was raised by midwestern farmers in middle of nowhere Kansas. These are exactly the kind of people that buy into and worship that kind of Idealized version of America, and Idealized version of humanity. It literally shapes who he is, and you can't have a version of superman that doesn't acknowledge this.

I get the appeal of people who would rather have Clark be Bruce, but not "getting" this fundamentally misunderstands what Superman is, and why he's motivated to do the things he does.
 
The only part of his movies where Snyder actually presents the real Superman is in the trailers. That's why.

Look at Man of Steel. The trailer is built around Jor-El giving him a speech about what Superman means. That he is the best of our nature. That he is a heightened ideal to strive toward. He literally says that. "You will give the people of earth an ideal to strive towards. They will race behind you. They will stumble, they will fall, but in time they will join you in the sun." Even the speech understands that Superman belongs in the sun! That he is lightness and good.

Cut to Snyder's portrayal of him in the films as a sulky, grumbling asshole.

The man loves to have his characters say one thing and then have everything about his film and its aesthetic choices say exactly the opposite.

That's because Snyder has no idea what Superman is. He's read a bunch of buzzwords and tag lines for Superman and assumed that he gets the character. The title of his first movie "Man of Steel" - doesn't factor into anything - it's just another tagline Snyder associates with Superman.

He wants to talk about the character's journey, but he doesn't understand the hero's journey . There is no arc to Snyder's Superman, no progression; only vague references and shameful pandering to illusory allegories that Snyder thinks represent the character..

He gives no motivation for Superman to become the titular character. The reason Superman in the comics (pre new 52 anyways) is the way he is comes down to his upbringing. He is a literal god raised amongst the most kind and humble people imagineable. The Kents of old never tried to treat him any differently than any other person, and instilled in him a desire to do right by his fellow man. He is a man born with great power, but in many adaptations authors do their best to show the limitations of his power. He might be faster than a speeding bullet, but even that isn't enough to save his adoptive father in many continuities. He can't be everywhere at once, can't right every wrong-and that's exactly the point. Even as a god, he has limitations. He recognizes them, however, and strives to not only be a protector but a guide for mankind. He inspires them to seek the best attributes within themselves.

The reason Superman is often called upon in times of Crisis (infinite and otherwise), is for those situations where even our best may not be enough. Mankind will often face challenges and outside threats it cannot overcome alone, but Superman will not overcome them alone. Men and women, super-powered and ordinary, fight alongside him against threats so overwhelming the average person cannot fathom them. But it is his ideal, his guiding example that inspires other heroes and ordinary citizens. People can shit on the DCAU all they want, but the Bruce Timm Superman cartoon illustrated this very clearly with the character of Dan Turpin. I won't spoil anything, but everyone should watch the episode in question.

Snyder is wrong, flat out wrong, on what makes Superman such an icon. It clearly shows in both Man of Steel and BvS.
 
A retro-futuristic art deco take would be interesting. Though I'd rather they get a modern take on this universe right first.
 
People wanting this movie to fail so WB reboots are delusional. If they don't make a profit on these movies they are shutting things down. If WB doesn't do it their stockholders will.

It looks like they will make money on this though. I know everyone was expecting 1 billion but the budget for the movie is 250 million. I don't how much more they spent on advertising and all but usually making 3 times the budget is considered good . Hitting 800 -900 will be decent for this film and enough to keep WB in the game. Marvel wasn't hitting a billion when starting their universe and WB is expected to because of the characters alone. Its still a negative start to a universe so SS and WW have to turn the ship around or at best you're getting stand alone movies and the connected universe is scrapped. At worst they will just drop everything.

I think the current estimate is that due to marketing costs, they need to hit $800M to at least be profitable, which should still happen with ease.

Speaking of costs though, something else people don't often bring up is how expensive these past two DC films have been. MoS had a $225M budget, which is $5M more than the budget for Avengers. The 2nd most expensive phase 1 movie is Iron Man 2 at $200M, the other four films cost $140-150M.
 
Expected. It's a 0 out of 5 movie for me. Theater was packed (this is in EA) when I saw it, but the amount of times the audience responded to anything that was happening on screen would convince you that no one was in there. It was very bad. Some folks showed up with Superman capes. I imagine the capes have been burned/disposed of by now.

I knew the movie was a nightmare when
(1) Batman's origin was included and (2) Superman returned to his roots as a philosophy major and started pondering his role on Earth for the centillionth time
. I've said it before (might have been on another forum), but WB never understood the success of TDK. I honestly believe they think the movie worked because in their mind(s), they are convinced TDK was a philosophy movie with action thrown in. Unbeknownst to them, the movie worked because it was an action movie with philosophy thrown in. It's a subtle but extraordinarily important difference, because it is the key to making a good DC movie.

At this point in time, I honestly believe a 2nd grader can come up with a better DC movie. I honestly, truthfully, believe that. I'm not saying that as a joke or to try and demean the talent and efforts of the writers behind BvS. I really do believe that Warner Bros. should consider focus testing and surveying 2nd graders for their next movies. If you've ever interacted or communicated with a 2nd grader, you would know that their minds can go places. That is precisely what the DC movies need. They need to be movies that actually go places. They need imagination, creativity, and a willingness to take risks. I hope they can figure it out.

Dash_Riprock said:
MCU Captain America is a better Superman than Snyderman.

100% agreed.

Hasphat'sAnts said:
I think it's time to ask ourselves why Superman works better in trailers than movies.

It's actually not complicated. Superman works in trailers because the trailers show him in action. Superman doesn't work in the full movie(s) because the movies show him engaged in an intrapersonal conflict. In other words, the trailers show him coping, the movies show him moping. I might put together a PowerPoint tomorrow to explain this further, because frankly my Sunday is looking light on tasks and unlike Superman I actually enjoy doing things that can benefit people rather than spending
two and a half hours questioning every single thing I do and how it's perceived and whether or not humanity would be better off without me and the consequences of leaving Earth and how to convince Laurence Fishburne to see the good side of me and the list goes on and on and on like a Superman scene with one of his parents somewhere in a farm with surprisingly limited livestock and plants because why would your farm be filled with livestock and plants when your son can shoot red lasers from his eyes and xray the environment at any point in time as he feels like oh but not when it actually matters because when it's time to fight Batman apparently the best way to do so is to walk straight into a guy with billions of dollars in tech and not even bother to scan the floor and walls before approaching him
. If I do the PowerPoint I'll try to keep it under 10 slides.
 
That's because Snyder has no idea what Superman is. He's read a bunch of buzzwords and tag lines for Superman and assumed that he gets the character. The title of his first movie "Man of Steel" - doesn't factor into anything - it's just another tagline Snyder associates with Superman.

He wants to talk about the character's journey, but he doesn't understand the hero's journey . There is no arc to Snyder's Superman, no progression; only vague references and shameful pandering to illusory allegories that Snyder thinks represent the character..

He gives no motivation for Superman to become the titular character. The reason Superman in the comics (pre new 52 anyways) is the way he is comes down to his upbringing. He is a literal god raised amongst the most kind and humble people imagineable. The Kents of old never tried to treat him any differently than any other person, and instilled in him a desire to do right by his fellow man. He is a man born with great power, but in many adaptations authors do their best to show the limitations of his power. He might be faster than a speeding bullet, but even that isn't enough to save his adoptive father in many continuities. He can't be everywhere at once, can't right every wrong-and that's exactly the point. Even as a god, he has limitations. He recognizes them, however, and strives to not only be a protector but a guide for mankind. He inspires them to seek the best attributes within themselves.

The reason Superman is often called upon in times of Crisis (infinite and otherwise), is for those situations where even our best may not be enough. Mankind will often face challenges and outside threats it cannot overcome alone, but Superman will not overcome them alone. Men and women, super-powered and ordinary, fight alongside him against threats so overwhelming the average person cannot fathom them. But it is his ideal, his guiding example that inspires other heroes and ordinary citizens. People can shit on the DCAU all they want, but the Bruce Timm Superman cartoon illustrated this very clearly with the character of Dan Turpin. I won't spoil anything, but everyone should watch the episode in question.

Snyder is wrong, flat out wrong, on what makes Superman such an icon. It clearly shows in both Man of Steel and BvS.

Well said, and I agree completely. I hate Snyder's version of Superman, because it's just not Superman.

The box office drop really isn't surprising. When I saw it last Sunday the theater was fairly empty, so the second week being empty isn't surprising either.
 
*Location?- Metropolis is just across the harbor from Gotham? Would it not have been simpler to just have Bats work from a Wayne satellite building in Metropolis?
I actually had issue with this, because I always thought Metropolis to Gotham was like NYC to Chicago. But I found a map and they are pretty much across from each other.

18s4c7deqv8fejpg.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom