James Gunn Announces 'Man of Tomorrow' releasing in theaters July 2027

rkofan87 said:
that is fast for a movie with a lot of cgi.
Click to expand...
Despite what he says, I gotta think he was deep in the pipeline for this even while maing superman and peacemaker s2. He isn't sitting around hoping the studio execs greenlight his next project, HE is the one greenlighting.
 
How on earth are they arriving at "$125M in profits, in theatrical revenue alone"?

They're all in on Superman because they understand the raft of other lower tier shit they had planned has next to no chance in a market where even a 'home run' Superman can only limp to break even. They need to resolve their Batman mess sooner rather than later.
 
Revolutionary said:
Superman is expected to end with a $125M profit for WB from theatrical alone. No wonder why WB is all in on a sequel so quickly

Click to expand...

I doubt this. Most likely they used WB's notoriously low balled budget numbers (like they did for Flash) instead of the 316m production budget + 150-200m marketing numbers that THR claimed was more accurate than what WB was claiming. Because there is no way they made 150m profit on a total budget of 400m (same as MI:FR mind you)
 
Klosshufvud said:
I doubt this. Most likely they used WB's notoriously low balled budget numbers (like they did for Flash) instead of the 316m production budget + 150-200m marketing numbers that THR claimed was more accurate than what WB was claiming. Because there is no way they made 150m profit on a total budget of 400m (same as MI:FR mind you)
Click to expand...
I'm sure Variety would appreciate if you contacted them next time to let them know that their insiders are wrong.
 
Klosshufvud said:
I doubt this. Most likely they used WB's notoriously low balled budget numbers (like they did for Flash) instead of the 316m production budget + 150-200m marketing numbers that THR claimed was more accurate than what WB was claiming. Because there is no way they made 150m profit on a total budget of 400m (same as MI:FR mind you)
Click to expand...

Idk how we would get to $125m theatrical profit even if we take their $225m production budget and pretend they spent $0 on marketing...

Revolutionary said:
I'm sure Variety would appreciate if you contacted them next time to let them know that their insiders are wrong.
Click to expand...

You mean like their WB insider cited in the article who disputed the figures? 😭
 
Whatever the numbers, Superman probably made more profit than Man of Steel did. Sure it made a bit less but the budget was smaller as well. Most critically the domestic take was a significantly greater share of the total, where WB gets the far bigger cut, especially compared to China.

Still not particularly amazing though. But it might well be the billion dollar hauls for non tentpole ensemble comic book movies are over.
 
Last edited:
Zathalus said:
Whatever the numbers, Superman probably made more profit than Man of Steel did. Sure it made a bit less but the budget was smaller as well. Most critically the domestic take was a significantly greater share of the total, where WB gets the far bigger cut, especially compared to China.

Still not particularly amazing though. But it might well be the billion dollar hauls for non tentpole ensemble comic book movies are over.
Click to expand...

I believe this is correct. Man of Steel sold more tickets, Superman made a bigger profit.

Personally I'm casting doubt it made $125m in profit from it's theater run alone. I'm really curious how they arrived at that figure, that seems high.
 
Last edited:
Seems like it was successful enough to justify more. And that is what mattered to the Execs. Gunn seems to be prolific in his writing, some good some mediocre. He certainly knows a lot of stuff about comics. I hope the next one is better. Take away the silly yelling out commands and I think that would have made the current superman better. If you just show it once or say you have built an algorithm to do it I think that would be better.

I assume there will be some movies between the next one and this one. I think they want to rebuild the Justice League.
 
If we are pretending neither spent anything on marketing -which is the only way I can see arriving at any noteworthy 'profit from theatrical revenue alone' for either of them- I have Superman at ~$73m 'profit', MoS at ~$87m nominal, MoS at ~$120m adjusted.

That's using 55% of domestic revenue and 40% of international, and it probably wouldn't take much change to that to have them switch places nominally.

If we include marketing I suspect they are both pretty comfortably underwater with 'theatrical revenue alone'.
 
SPOILER ALERT:

At the end of the movie, who the frigg was filming him as a child with the Clarks to have that kind of footage? Pretty big miss when it comes to suspension of disbelief. Too illogical.
 
calico said:
You mean like their WB insider cited in the article who disputed the figures?
Click to expand...
Lmao I can't believe I have to explain this but they're saying that Variety is lowballing it. You really think that they're trying to say "no, we actually made less money"? You're too funny.

calico said:
If we are pretending neither spent anything on marketing -which is the only way I can see arriving at any noteworthy 'profit from theatrical revenue alone' for either of them- I have Superman at ~$73m 'profit', MoS at ~$87m nominal, MoS at ~$120m adjusted.

That's using 55% of domestic revenue and 40% of international, and it probably wouldn't take much change to that to have them switch places nominally.

If we include marketing I suspect they are both pretty comfortably underwater with 'theatrical revenue alone'.
Click to expand...
According to Deadline, Man of Steel is confirmed to have a final theatrical profit of 42.7M (inflated to 59M), so you're wrong yet again.

Listen, it's clear that no one on GAF is on the same level as you and Klosshuh when it comes to box office analysis so you guys are probably better off posting your expert analyses to r/boxoffice where you'll certainly be taken seriously and totally not laughed out of the room.




ANYWAY I didn't post the link here to bring the inane box office talk into this thread. I'm pretty sure no one actually cares since it's been reduced to a dick measuring contest thanks to certain individuals like you.

I only posted the link because I thought it would give further context to why we're getting a timely sequel to the critically AND commercially successful Superman. :messenger_smiling_with_eyes:
 
Last edited:
Revolutionary said:
You really think that they're trying to say "no, we actually made less money"?
Click to expand...
Yes, the insider probably didn't want to seem like an idiot by also claiming they made $125m theatrical profit from ~$300m of theatrical income with a $225m production budget and pretending the movie had a marketing budget of $0. Feel free to elaborate on how that $125m has been arrived at.

Revolutionary said:
According to Deadline, Man of Steel is confirmed to have a final theatrical profit of 42.7M (inflated to 59M
Click to expand...
Can't find that article, and it would be pretty incredible if they used the same caveats I had to (theatrical income only, zero marketing budget).

Revolutionary said:
Listen, it's clear that no one on GAF is on the same level as you and Klosshuh when it comes to box office analysis so you guys are probably better off posting your expert analyses to r/boxoffice where you'll certainly be taken seriously and totally not laughed out of the room.
Click to expand...
You posted it here. Don't sulk because you can't defend it from challenge.
 
I hope all the different movies come together and build a juggernaut. I for one know that I am bored to death by the MCU. If we can get an amazing Batman to this universe then I'll be very happy. I just wonder what level of cinema it'll be. The Batman and Nolan's Batman seem to be too serious for what Gunn wants. It'll probably be like the 90s TAS, which I don't mind at all. I'd love something like a live-action Mask of the Phantasm.

uMrjgeyzgbpLIVUC.jpg


HarryKS said:
SPOILER ALERT:

At the end of the movie, who the frigg was filming him as a child with the Clarks to have that kind of footage? Pretty big miss when it comes to suspension of disbelief. Too illogical.
Click to expand...
The Clarks?
 
Last edited:
Folks keep talking about production budget and marketing... Not realizing marketing also brought money in with all these companies paying DC Studios ... DC Studios didn't pay them. They got money through Progressive, Wendy's, etc.
 
HarryKS said:
SPOILER ALERT:

At the end of the movie, who the frigg was filming him as a child with the Clarks to have that kind of footage? Pretty big miss when it comes to suspension of disbelief. Too illogical.
Click to expand...
I initially had an issue with Supergirl. She takes off from Krypton as a teenager (iirc...in 99% of her back stores) and in the context of this movie she would totally know that Superman's parents were all about subjecting earth or whatever. But...her being drunk was a cool throwback so I let it slide.
 
Miyazaki's Slave said:
I initially had an issue with Supergirl. She takes off from Krypton as a teenager (iirc...in 99% of her back stores) and in the context of this movie she would totally know that Superman's parents were all about subjecting earth or whatever. But...her being drunk was a cool throwback so I let it slide.
Click to expand...
I'm curious if she got a "if you must, be as big a ho as you can to propagate the race!", orrrrrrrrr a "we know he is your cousin but on most of the Earth is ok" talk :P
 
DeafTourette said:
Folks keep talking about production budget and marketing... Not realizing marketing also brought money in with all these companies paying DC Studios ... DC Studios didn't pay them. They got money through Progressive, Wendy's, etc.
Click to expand...

I tried explaining this in the Review Thread. Too many people think Warner Bros pays everyone out of pocket to put Superman on their cover. That's not how it works.

People are out of their minds if they actually think WB spent $150 - $200m on Marketing alone and out of pocket. That would be an insanely irresponsible use of a studio's money.
 
calico said:
You posted it here. Don't sulk because you can't defend it from challenge.
Click to expand...
It's an unbiased news article from a well-known trade publication for industry professionals - it doesn't need defending.

Get a grip already and quit your nonsense.

Madflavor said:
I tried explaining this in the Review Thread. Too many people think Warner Bros pays everyone out of pocket to put Superman on their cover. That's not how it works.

People are out of their minds if they actually think WB spent $150 - $200m on Marketing alone and out of pocket. That would be an insanely irresponsible use of a studio's money.
Click to expand...
I mentioned months ago that WB skipping the Super Bowl was probably a wise decision because SB commercials cost an absurd amount of money. Also consider that Superman had a relatively 'unknown' cast compared to Man of Steel which, according to Deadline, ballooned MoS's budget into being barely profitable in comparison. When we take into account how relatively frugal they seemed to have been with this movie, the new 125M profit figure doesn't seem far fetched to me at all.
 
Revolutionary said:
Lmao I can't believe I have to explain this but they're saying that Variety is lowballing it. You really think that they're trying to say "no, we actually made less money"? You're too funny.


According to Deadline, Man of Steel is confirmed to have a final theatrical profit of 42.7M (inflated to 59M), so you're wrong yet again.

Listen, it's clear that no one on GAF is on the same level as you and Klosshuh when it comes to box office analysis so you guys are probably better off posting your expert analyses to r/boxoffice where you'll certainly be taken seriously and totally not laughed out of the room.




ANYWAY I didn't post the link here to bring the inane box office talk into this thread. I'm pretty sure no one actually cares since it's been reduced to a dick measuring contest thanks to certain individuals like you.

I only posted the link because I thought it would give further context to why we're getting a timely sequel to the critically AND commercially successful Superman. :messenger_smiling_with_eyes:
Click to expand...
You don't have to be mad. It's ok to admit the source you once thought was great turns out to have full of assumed flaws that even the corporate insider debunked. It happens to the best of us.
 
DeafTourette said:
Folks keep talking about production budget and marketing... Not realizing marketing also brought money in with all these companies paying DC Studios ... DC Studios didn't pay them. They got money through Progressive, Wendy's, etc.
Click to expand...
The claim was "in theatrical revenue alone".

Revolutionary said:
It's an unbiased news article from a well-known trade publication for industry professionals
Click to expand...
"A studio insider disputed these figures without providing specific numbers..." -the article

Their own insider is saying the numbers are inaccurate.
 
I'm happy I got my 4K steel book edition preorder from Walmart locked in the day it was available. That thing has been sold out since like a week after it went live on Amazon, Target, and Walmart IIRC. It's still unavailable at all three retailers.

But seeing as the movie is so profitable, well received, and popular, maybe WB will do a second production (printing?).

HarryKS said:
SPOILER ALERT:

At the end of the movie, who the frigg was filming him as a child with the Clarks to have that kind of footage? Pretty big miss when it comes to suspension of disbelief. Too illogical.
Click to expand...

Krypto
 
Last edited:
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt said:
I'm really curious in seeing how he's gonna to differiate DCU Batman from Reeves Batmanverse
Click to expand...
Just keep it gritty and grounded with no metahuman stuff. I never watched The Penguin show but are there ANY fantastical elements in it?

I'm assuming the clayface movie will have a new Batman and be more in line with the Schumacher batman than anything, i.e. super science, magic, sci-fi tech, etc.
 
jason10mm said:
Just keep it gritty and grounded with no metahuman stuff. I never watched The Penguin show but are there ANY fantastical elements in it?

I'm assuming the clayface movie will have a new Batman and be more in line with the Schumacher batman than anything, i.e. super science, magic, sci-fi tech, etc.
Click to expand...
I think he will be closer to Affleck Batman than that. The look was great and you can imagine him fighting the more fantastical villians. I would keep the look similar but have longer ears.
 
jason10mm said:
Just keep it gritty and grounded with no metahuman stuff. I never watched The Penguin show but are there ANY fantastical elements in it?

I'm assuming the clayface movie will have a new Batman and be more in line with the Schumacher batman than anything, i.e. super science, magic, sci-fi tech, etc.
Click to expand...

If they go that route to differiate themselves from Reeveverse Batman I would be fine with it. I just hope that Reeve doesn't stop making shows and movies after he's done making The Batman Part III. And I'm specifying Part III due to WB most likely giving him at least three movies and whatever shows he wants to make inbetween set in the Reeveverse
 
Honestly I think he would still do this film regardless of all the fuzz about sucess and stuff. Its all part of this DCU bigass plan to involve more characters, try to connect stuff and all. All this commotion painting Superman big time is meanless in the great scale of DC movies.
 
Trilobit said:
I hope all the different movies come together and build a juggernaut. I for one know that I am bored to death by the MCU. If we can get an amazing Batman to this universe then I'll be very happy. I just wonder what level of cinema it'll be. The Batman and Nolan's Batman seem to be too serious for what Gunn wants. It'll probably be like the 90s TAS, which I don't mind at all. I'd love something like a live-action Mask of the Phantasm.

uMrjgeyzgbpLIVUC.jpg



The Clarks?
Click to expand...
Who is holding the camera? Because it's not them. Not drones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

According to James Gunn, The Batman 2 doesn't even have a script at this point
45
987
Avid Reading Horse replied
SPACEBALLS 2 Teaser (2027)
2
87
1K
MrA replied
Superman Day - Behind The Scenes Look Of James Gunn's Superman
18
2K
Sticks replied
Star Wars: Starfighter comes to theaters on May 28, 2027, directed by Shawn Levy and starring Ryan Gosling
2
63
3K
Lunarorbit replied
Uniqlo x Studio Ghibli collection - releasing July 4
17
778
Puscifer replied
Top Bottom