Oh, I don't think you can compare those two films at all. Superman is overly ambitious but it's heart is in the right place. TLJ was a deliberate sabotage of everything Star Wars fans loved and a slap in the face of the derivative "mystery box" shit J.J. Abrams handed to him.
Nothing in Superman is like that. Superman cares for his people, he rescues himself, he kisses the girl. There is a little bit of a "nerd dun good" insecurity aspect to him that I don't think Superman would really have by the time he is soaring around wearing the cape but it doesn't hold him back much.
thismeinteil
Member
While I don't think Superman is as malicious as TLJ, it definitely has something that seriously fucks with the lore that is just as insulting.
Trilobit
Absolutely Cozy
I finally watched it today. I enjoyed it very much. It was entertaining from beginning to end and had a very good Supes, Lois and Lex. Sure, it feels like a McDonald's meal and isn't something I'll remember, but it provided a fun ride with some heartfelt moments sprinkled in between. I think it set up the tone and characters nicely for better sequels that may provide some more meat to the bone.
Physiognomonics
Member
Synder first 2 superman were the best superman we ever had.
Jinzo Prime
Gold Member
This movie will eventually make money, but just getting over the budget is not profit. Theaters take 50% of the domestic gross and the ad spend fot this movie has been reported as higher than normal.
It will be profitable, but that is a misleading headline.
Last edited:
Madflavor
Member
I enjoyed Man of Steel, but I had some serious issues with some of it's elements. Batman v Superman was fucking miserable and I hated that movie on so many different levels.
So far Gunn's Superman, the actual character of Superman, is more my speed.
Domestically it's very solid. We'll see how it's legs are. Internationally they are definitely in trouble though. I think it was stupid of them to jump the gunn and start immediately filming Supergirl before Superman released. They're locked in now. They better have a modest budget for that film.
I'd imagine they're probably going to fastrack Wonder Woman and Batman after this.
Nah, I think they need a follow-up to this quickly. Issue is what tone will Supergirl have, and who will they pair her with? A solo female superhero film is doomed to failure so I bet we will a TON of Mamoa's Lobo character heading into it. At this point he is, far and away, the largest name in the DCU stable and his track record is very good. I think Supergirl is gonna do well.
As for Batman, WW, Flash, etc, I suspect we will get bits of them before a main film. Especially Batman, I'm sure he will be in Clayface, whether we get a real actor or just a stuntman in a costume, remains to be seen.
VulcanRaven
Member
Superman 2 will probably be Superman/Supergirl movie. I hope WB doesn't force them to include Batman.
SamuraiEdge
Member
IlGialloMondadori
Member
Good write up, but…this is many times better than the last Jedi.
Hawking Radiation
Wants to watch an Event Horizon porno
Its passable but a Superman movie shouldn't be passable especially when its the movie to kickstart a whole new connected universe. Not liking it is not what i should have used in my initial post because it wasn't terrible. Just not a movie focused on the character I wanted to see the most.
Exactly. The good is the Clarke, Lois, Kents, Lex parts. The apartment fight/interview, Clarke being on the farm with Ma and Pa Kent, those scenes were brilliant and I loved it but its so short lived. Those characters should have been at the core of this movie then introduce the Justice Gang towards the end or even have them as an after credits scene. End credit scenes was another issue. You could hear the collective groans from people in the theatre after those 2 end credits scenes were done.
Yeah I'm venting a bit but there's an excellent Superman movie under all this extra unnecessary fluff and I was rooting for this to be a roaring success.
You'd be surprised to know that 25 minutes got cut because test audiences thought it was too goofy and thank God for that. Honestly will just take the movie what it is and not at all interested in a Gunn cut. That's going to devalue the experience even more for me.
Last edited:
KyoZz
Tag, you're it.
You mean a Superman that is torturing a president? This is your idea of Superman? Hard disagree, Superman should ALWAYS inspire people, not doing this shit...
Remember the bully scene from Man of Steel? THAT was inspiring. He start by making fun of Clark, then Clark save him and the bully start to act like a better person to finnaly comfort Clark later in the movie when he gets attacked by other kids.
This is MY Superman. Hopeful, full of heart, inspiring, human. Not some dude that loose his temper way too often. Also he don't care if Hawkgirl is killing that president at the end. WTF??
Gunn's movie is a terrible Superman take and I'm really surprised at how much the fans let slide because it's him.
Revolutionary
Member
Updated weekend BO numbers for those that care:
It's a success no matter how you cut it, and a strong start for our new DCU.
Also confirmed that the marketing budget was 100M, not 200 like a certain group of very sad individuals want you to believe...
It's a success no matter how you cut it, and a strong start for our new DCU.
Also confirmed that the marketing budget was 100M, not 200 like a certain group of very sad individuals want you to believe...
I've seen a TON of superman spots, so if that's what a $100 mill spend looks like then Disney dropped about a buck fiddy on Brave New World and Thunderbolts and and even 100 bucks on FFFS
Revolutionary
Member
Aren't Super Bowl ads absurdly expensive? Remember that DC skipped the Super Bowl while Disney had ads for all 3 of those movies (and more).I've seen a TON of superman spots, so if that's what a $100 mill spend looks like then Disney dropped about a buck fiddy on Brave New World and Thunderbolts and and even 100 bucks on FFFS
To be honest, the only Superman ad I've seen is his appearance in Fortnite, and DC emailing me about new movie merch. But then again I have adblock on almost everything lol
VulcanRaven
Member
I don't play Fortnite but that trailer was amazing.
Lambogenie
Member
Too bad loads of people can't help but Iver analyse. Like Fillion says, it's just a movie, guys. It's a fun, entertaining movie.
KyoZz
Tag, you're it.
This apply to both the "success" of this film and the comment to the 100M marketing budget.
For the box office I urge you to not even believe me, but look for yourself and compare 
It's not doing well, it's ok in the US (not incredible or amazing or any other superlatif) but oversee is just terrible. It is already beyond JW AND F1 in many market. For example the film opened lower than MORBIUS in Germany.
If the movie keep doing well in the US it might break 550M total worldwide, if it crumble it might even not pass 500M...
Here is a breakdown I made earlier today, it was in French so sorry if my quick translation is not perfect but it will give you an idea:
- France: The film is second here, behind Jurassic World (no figures yet).
- China: After a disastrous Monday (average of 2.3 admissions per screening, the lowest among the top 10 major releases in 2025), Superman is now expected to gross $0.8 million in its second weekend (-87%), with a total of $10 million.
- Ireland: The film is performing well, but it only represents $0.57 million...
- Hungary: Superman debuts in third place with 28,238 spectators, while Jurassic World: Rebirth remains in first place with 48,783 spectators and F1 in second place with 34,082 spectators.
- Portugal: Superman debuts in first place with 51,870 admissions, a result similar to that of Jurassic World Rebirth last week. Its opening is higher than that of Thunderbolts*, but lower than that of Captain America 4. It is also lower than that of Black Adam and Birds of Prey.
- Spain: The film opened at #1 but is closely followed by Jurassic World, which will likely overtake it on Tuesday. Superman grossed about $400,000 less than Joker: Folie à Deux and about 40% less than The Batman. And less than any DC film in the Snyderverse (minus Aquaman 2).
- England: One of the best markets, the film is currently #1 with an opening of 6.9 million, but that's much less than The Batman (13.5 million), and the film isn't drawing a crowd either, despite the heatwave that suggested a return to theaters.
- Italy: The film starts second with a total of 1.5 million, once again behind JW.
- Indonesia: Superman debuts in second place, still behind Jurassic World...
- Thailand: The film is #1, but only 1 point before Jurassic World. This is a territory where SH films normally perform very well. JW will quickly return to #1 there too.
But again I advice you don't buy the big title those trade are pushing and look for yourself. Go beyond the domestic BO, my expectation:
Domestic: 300/350M
OS: 150/200M
Total: 450/550M
Edit: btw the famous "exceed expectation" is always hilarious. They publish a low celling so they can then say this precisely.
Last edited:
VulcanRaven
Member
It seems to be doing well in India:
www.pinkvilla.com
Superman Box Office: Man of Steel lifts off to 29cr weekend in India
The weekend ranks as the third biggest ever for a DC film, behind Batman v Superman and Aquaman. In terms of the pure Friday-Saturday-Sunday frame, Superman actually tops the list.
Dragon_Rocks
Member
This Superman is right candidate to become Injustice Superman. Superman should always be above and better than normal humans. This one is so human that surely a right tragedy will tilt him enough to become Injustice Superman.
Fake
Member
I'm sure people choise to ignore the 'break even' factor while complaining about folks ignoring others factors.
The movie will be fine.
That evil Superman from Batman vs Superman scene was the best we can get from this. I not even like that movie, but that part of the movie was great for me.
The movie will be fine.
That evil Superman from Batman vs Superman scene was the best we can get from this. I not even like that movie, but that part of the movie was great for me.
Last edited:
thismeinteil
Member
Success? It has yet to break even, which will happen at ~$650M. It's foreign take is below expectations. And it didn't exceed domestic expectations, it met them after they lowered before it came out and was still on the lower end of those expectations. Some were predicting it would hit $140M-$150M+. We have yet to see its legs during the 2nd weekend. Or its 3rd, when Fantastic Four hits theaters.
Right now, WB is playing anything that happens with this DCU as a success because like idiots they decided to rush things, yet again, and are going all in on the Gunnverse. They already have series and other movies on the way. That's why they said they'll be happy with $500M+, even though that means they'll be losing money.
Last edited:
Ulysses 31
Member
Naw, it needs more than 650M to break even since ticket price shares aren't 50% across the glove, in China for example they take around 70-80%. And the suits don't spend 100s of millions just to break even or make a few million bucks after a few years...
Madflavor
Member
A film doesn't stop profiting once in ends its theatrical run. In case people didn't know…
It'll be fine. They said weeks ago that they'd be happy to do anything over $500m and I believe them. Look at the BO performance of their last handful of DC films. They know the brand is fucked.
It'll be fine. They said weeks ago that they'd be happy to do anything over $500m and I believe them. Look at the BO performance of their last handful of DC films. They know the brand is fucked.
thismeinteil
Member
Possibly. But, it's just an easy average to go with. Foreign countries usually take more than 50%. Domestic is usually slightly lower than 50%, at least in the opening weeks. I'd just go $650M-$675M.Naw, it needs more than 650M to break even since ticket price shares aren't 50% across the glove, in China for example they take around 70-80%. And the suits don't spend 100s of millions just to break even or make a few million bucks after a few years...
What's funny is the reporting of numbers has changed, too. When Man of Steel launched, preview showings weren't including in with it's $116M weekend haul. With Superman '25 they are. So MOS actually made more when you include preview screenings of both, with $128M vs $125M domestically. And that doesn't even include inflation.
Last edited:
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
By Superman's own admission, he threatened the Borovian president with an empty threat he was never gonna make good on.
And he wasn't there to see Kendra drop him to his death.
Fun fact: Borovian president was the Russian businessman from 2012.
KyoZz
Tag, you're it.
I don't care, Superman don't act like that. This is all but inspiring.
I will make a lengthy review once I rewatch it at home, until then I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy and double standard of some people.
Madflavor
Member
It's worth pointing out that Man of Steel came out when the DC brand was strong and was riding off the success of TDK Trilogy. Nolan's name was attached to the film, and the cinematography looked like TDK movies. It's not really surprise that film did better for its time than Superman 25.
Superman 25 came out in a Post Covid Era, with CBM fatigue setting in, and DC movies pissing their pants constantly.
Fake
Member
And is not like will be another Super hero movie around, right?
StreetsofBeige
Member
WB wanting only $500M or so doesnt make sense. That's got to be lowball speak to make it sound successful.
If the movie cost $300M to make (production + marketing), the theatre breakeven will be probably about $650-700 as it's 50/50 split in US/Canada, but other regions they get a crappier cut. So a $500M target wouldnt make sense as they'd be losing money already. Their goal should be $1B.
A $500M target is the same as what Ant Man 1 did. WB is looking for Superman to do what Ant Man does?
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Member
It's amazing how people get the whole theatre math wrong. And most of the time they dont even include the marketing budget on top of it. And when people do the math, people arent including additional rev later on like streaming, DVDs etc...
It's like they think theatres show the movies for free.
If a PC cost Dell $1,000 in parts to make, nobody would assume if they sold it for $1,000 they'd be breaking even or making profit since that just covers the parts cost, and excludes marketing, shipping and all other costs associated with the company. But for some reason weird reason when a movie costs $100M to make, some people think if it gets $100M in gate receipts it's breakeven.
Weird people.
Last edited:
thismeinteil
Member
I'd say it's more BW fatigue when it comes to comic book movies. Too many of them come off as by the numbers films. Filled with too many tone killing jokes. And it's made worse when they're not worried about telling a great story in their own movie, but instead setting up for future movies. This is something Superman '25 does too much. This should have had a sole focus on Superman, with maybe one or two villains. Leave the building up to other characters and movies for the after credits and sequels.
But, DC is in a rush to have what Marvel did have for 10 years, a highly successful and profitable universe. They fucked it up before by rushing. And now they're doing it again. It's actually quite humorous to watch.
kpopSuperstar
Member
I don't understand why they don't do like Iron Man and Captain America, where they built them up over several films.
People ended up getting to know the characters and wanting to see more of them.
Without that, who knows what the MCU would be.
Corenswet is great as Superman, but one movie ain't enough. Let us get used to the character, make a trilogy, then start to expand things and add new characters.
People ended up getting to know the characters and wanting to see more of them.
Without that, who knows what the MCU would be.
Corenswet is great as Superman, but one movie ain't enough. Let us get used to the character, make a trilogy, then start to expand things and add new characters.
StreetsofBeige
Member
By going by what I read and heard, it sounds like shit. I know I'd hate it. It doesn't even sound like a Superman movie in tone, plot or focus. I'm not expecting a modern Superman movie to be ultra low budget and nerdy fun like Reeve being geeky Clark Kent, but as some streamers described, it sounds like Superman 25 is more like one part Guardians of the Galaxy and one part brow beaten Superman into a wimp. That is not what a Superman movie should be.
I could already tell by the trailer with him getting licked by his dog it was going to be weird.
No way I'm wasting money on it, so I'll watch it when it shows up on my streaming box. I probably wont even bother watching the whole movie like me rewatching Gladiator (2000) the other day when I was pleasantly surprised seeing it as I was randomly flipping movie channels.
Last edited:
March Climber
Member
Saw it today. I mostly agree with the sentiment that it feels as if you're catching up on a random season 2 episode of a show that happened to be playing on TV.
As a matter of fact, I have the perfect comparison. It feels like these:
All of those recent DC animated movies that kind of capture a moment in time of a specific comic book arc. They're good movies, but you have to have some comic lore knowledge and a know a slight hint of what you're about to watch, in order to grasp it all. That's what this Superman movie felt like, an animated film script put into a live action shell.
I think the movie could have been longer for breathing room purposes, and quite honestly it felt like there was more that might have been cut for an extended cut release. Maybe WB gave Gunn a strict/rigid time limit, because the guardians trilogy didn't feel this fast paced and 'information overload' in style.
Otherwise I enjoyed the movie. The scenes between Clark and Lois were great and naturalistic, same with him and his parents. I just would have liked to see the buildup of Lex vs Supes more, conversationally. Same with Supes and the Justice Gang. It was such a fast ramp-up that felt very 'season-ender' in style.
It feels like Gunn didn't want to give the audience too much time to take in a scene, so after a potentially heavy convo it was a fast 'snap' to the next scene, which was usually action or fast paced in nature. The action was a bit weightless but fun to watch.
I'm around to a B in rating, same as most of the animated movies in my pic above.
Extended cut could raise it to a B+.
As a matter of fact, I have the perfect comparison. It feels like these:
All of those recent DC animated movies that kind of capture a moment in time of a specific comic book arc. They're good movies, but you have to have some comic lore knowledge and a know a slight hint of what you're about to watch, in order to grasp it all. That's what this Superman movie felt like, an animated film script put into a live action shell.
I think the movie could have been longer for breathing room purposes, and quite honestly it felt like there was more that might have been cut for an extended cut release. Maybe WB gave Gunn a strict/rigid time limit, because the guardians trilogy didn't feel this fast paced and 'information overload' in style.
Otherwise I enjoyed the movie. The scenes between Clark and Lois were great and naturalistic, same with him and his parents. I just would have liked to see the buildup of Lex vs Supes more, conversationally. Same with Supes and the Justice Gang. It was such a fast ramp-up that felt very 'season-ender' in style.
It feels like Gunn didn't want to give the audience too much time to take in a scene, so after a potentially heavy convo it was a fast 'snap' to the next scene, which was usually action or fast paced in nature. The action was a bit weightless but fun to watch.
I'm around to a B in rating, same as most of the animated movies in my pic above.
Extended cut could raise it to a B+.
StreetsofBeige
Member
Off topic: I'm not a comic reader, so I only go with what I know and movies. BTAS is awesome. As crazy as it seems, I rank that show better than all superhero movies I've seen. Only supe movies I'd put up there are Bale Batman flicks 1 and 2, and Blade 1 and 2. The third movie in each trilogy were garbage.Saw it today. I mostly agree with the sentiment that it feels as if you're catching up on a random season 2 episode of a show that happened to be playing on TV.
As a matter of fact, I have the perfect comparison. It feels like these:
I decided to just wing it and spend like $12 to buy a Batman cartoon movie called Dark Knight Returns. It was excellent.
rubik's dude
Member
And the movie too, Mask of the Phantasm fucking slaps. I watched it again recently after not having seen it in years, couldn't believe how well it held up.
StreetsofBeige
Member
Pretty sure I never saw it in full. I remember seeing bits of it on TV long time ago. Probably Fox showed it on a weekend and I caught some of it. I'll remember it for my watchlist (including many gaffers reco'ing the car movie called Rush).
I always found it odd that BTAS (and the DK Returns) are animated flicks. One was even shown on Fox as after school fodder shown before dinnertime. Yet, the plots and tone are so much better than big budget superhero movies. It should be the other way around.
I'd put that BTAS episode with Scarecrow where Batman goes nuts (I think it's called Dreams in Darkness) as better than any hollywood budget superhero movie - even Bale Batman movies.
Last edited:
March Climber
Member
rubik's dude
and
StreetsofBeige
For reference, I mainly mean the animated movies that came out post-2014/2015 up until recently, where WB were just kind of releasing a string of animated movies where the characters shared the same exact designs throughout each, but they were disconnected stories. The Batman in each one looked the same, which was this design:
All voiced by Roger Clark IIRC because the 90s voice actor Kevin Conroy was slowly retiring from the role (or being pushed out of it).
The Frank Miller animated adaptations, 'The Dark Knight Returns' and 'Batman Year One' both 2011 and 2012 are both considered special releases by comparison.
