Support NeoGAF

[Just_myles]

Straight bullshit. Superman is directly responsible for his share of the destruction. Especially in Smallville, where he takes the fight in the first place. Then in Metropolis, he throws Zod through structures, jumps out of the way of a gas tanker to let it destroy a building, and shows absolutely no attempt to save lives or prevent destruction until the neck snap. Oh, and then there's the creepy, gross sucking face with Lois on top of a pile of corpses.

Then the movie ends with him destroying expensive government property for the lols.

These arguments have been around since 2013 and the facts haven't changed. I've seen the movie 4 times, as recently as 2 days ago. Superman's responsibility to the death and destruction in Man of Steel is a completely valid criticism.

The problem is how they're laying out all of their movies. One kryptonian with bad intentions is a justice league level threat. But, a small army of them are an even bigger problem.

They blew their load on the first movie.

To make things worse, not only did he kill the guy but, he ends up killing the same fucking guy again in the next movie.. which I believe was definitely a justice league problem.

My point is... with better pacing of their movies this would have gone down so much better.

There could have been a lead up to the Kryptonian invasion. Superman could have been the superman that we knew.... until he kills Zod. Then we can have that context/contrast. Then I would not have minded him being grim dark Superman for a movie or two(perhaps up until the Darkseid invasion).

This is not rocket science. Pick up a god damn comic WB.

 

[Clear]

Personally I think its an epic douche-move to preemptively throw a bunch of people under the bus (the WW crew and company) as part of transparently pissy attempt to get back at a former employer.

 

[Boombloxer]

Look, whether or not Wonder Woman is indeed a mess remains to be seen but there's not a shred of evidence that this writer can back up anything in that article. Yet it's taken at face value while Jenkins tweet was met with "damage control". Explain that one to me.

I don't buy either as being 100% true, big movies are challenging period, look at Fast 8. But they have no trust at the moment--their films have been polarizing at best, and terrible misfires at worst.

It's not baffling to why some people are jumping on that bandwagon.

 

[IconGrist]

Posted? Mayimbe saying his source(s) report a lot of inaccuracies. Letter likely fake.

https://twitter.com/elmayimbe/status/764208124534272001

Originally posted by Umberto Gonzalez
FANBOY NATION! Looked into pajiba letter & it reeks to me of a fugazzi. Per my sourcing, WAY too many inaccuracies.

 

[Just_myles]

I don't buy either as being 100% true, big movies are challenging period, look at Fast 8. But they have no trust at the moment--their films have been polarizing at best, and terrible misfires at worst.

It's not baffling to why some people are jumping on that bandwagon.

It's not really surprising at all that people jump on the bandwagon.

FANBOY NATION! Looked into pajiba letter & it reeks to me of a fugazzi. Per my sourcing, WAY too many inaccuracies.

The article itself is suspect and to be honest, is not something I would classify as ether. If the person had given their real name and Kevin Tsujihara responded, then maybe.

Anyway, I have no faith in this studio delivering after what I consider 3 misfires.

 

[Hazelhurst]

I would not make this argument. And here's why: I wrote this letter last year. I actually started forming it in my head after Man of Steel was a box office failure instead of the modern classic tentpole you were expecting.

Last I checked, Man of Steel was a box office success.

Budget: $225 million
Marketing: $150 million
Worldwide Box Office: $668 million

WB is looking at a profit of about $300 million on box office gross alone. The last attempt at a Superman movie (Superman Returns) didn't even make a profit if you include marketing costs. I would call Man of Steel a box office success, not a failure.

 

[DeathyBoy]

Last I checked, Man of Steel was a box office success.

Budget: $225 million
Marketing: $150 million
Worldwide Box Office: $668 million

WB is looking at a profit of about $300 million on box office gross alone. The last attempt at a Superman movie (Superman Returns) didn't even make a profit if you include marketing costs. I would call Man of Steel a box office success, not a failure.

Son, just don't. Gaf has decided DC box office is disappointing.

 

[Cosmonaut X]

Last I checked, Man of Steel was a box office success.

Budget: $225 million
Marketing: $150 million
Worldwide Box Office: $668 million

WB is looking at a profit of about $300 million on box office gross alone. The last attempt at a Superman movie (Superman Returns) didn't even make a profit if you include marketing costs. I would call Man of Steel a box office success, not a failure.

Depends entirely on how much of the WW gross WB see back. As I understand it, they only see a smaller percentage of the ticket sales from non-US territories, which is why most of the breakeven figures are far higher than production budget+marketing costs as they only get a percentage of the gross.

 

[Diprosalic]

Last I checked, Man of Steel was a box office success.

Budget: $225 million
Marketing: $150 million
Worldwide Box Office: $668 million

WB is looking at a profit of about $300 million on box office gross alone. The last attempt at a Superman movie (Superman Returns) didn't even make a profit if you include marketing costs. I would call Man of Steel a box office success, not a failure.

First off you are assuming that they got almost 100% of the ticket sales which they don't and then you assume that the foreign intake is worth the same as domestic which it isn't. Third of all you are just looking at "did it make money" as a sign of success which maybe it did but that was supposed to be the start of an easy money maker that can finance other projects, a safety net for the studio. It's freaking Superman and it only got a decent intake, that is not a success. The fact that the studio head resigned shortly after it came out should be a sign.

 

[IconGrist]

First off you are assuming that they got almost 100% of the ticket sales which they don't and then you assume that the foreign intake is worth the same as domestic which it isn't. Third of all you are just looking at "did it make money" as a sign of success which maybe it did but that was supposed to be the start of an easy money maker that can finance other projects, a safety net for the studio. It's freaking Superman and it only got a decent intake, that is not a success. The fact that the studio head resigned shortly after it came out should be a sign.

You can't say "it's freaking Superman" without taking into account his declining popularity. Just because it's Superman doesn't mean the world loses its mind in a rush to go see it. I'd say given that MoS has outperformed every major solo Superman movie it did well. If WB expected it to do a bill that's on them for poorly reading the market.

 

[StopMakingSense]

Last I checked, Man of Steel was a box office success.

Budget: $225 million
Marketing: $150 million
Worldwide Box Office: $668 million

WB is looking at a profit of about $300 million on box office gross alone. The last attempt at a Superman movie (Superman Returns) didn't even make a profit if you include marketing costs. I would call Man of Steel a box office success, not a failure.

That's a very incorrect understanding of WB's revenue.

 

[Blader]

Last I checked, Man of Steel was a box office success.

Budget: $225 million
Marketing: $150 million
Worldwide Box Office: $668 million

WB is looking at a profit of about $300 million on box office gross alone. The last attempt at a Superman movie (Superman Returns) didn't even make a profit if you include marketing costs. I would call Man of Steel a box office success, not a failure.

The studio gets about 50 percent of the box office gross (I think it's 55 of domestic and 45 of overseas, so let's split the difference there). So on a $668 million gross, WB would see about $330 million of that, which wouldn't break even.

Granted, merch and home video would get them into the black, but that's not a box office success then.