BATMAN V SUPERMAN WEEKEND THREAD | 166.01M OW, New March OW Record. 420.4M WW OW.

[incognitoo]

6 hours ago, Chewy said:

 

Jeb's a response to something pathetic, DeHaan's when anyone asks a question and you feel like being an asshole instead of answering, and Kitschface is when you're not sure if you like something or not

 

    

 

Out of likes so: Thank you Chewy.

[ZattMurdock]

9 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

170m is fine — or at least decent enough for WB to save some face after those reviews. Once again some people on the forum build up absurd expectations and are inevitably disappointed. I wonder if that condition has a name.

 

WB need to fastrack that solo Batman movie. As the only superhero I have modicum of interest in it's rather annoying that he's already condemned to another DC universe Snyder film. 

Watch this until the end, if you can. Do some effort and do it:

 

 

http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/ben-affleck-confirms-hes-working-something-with-dcs-geoff-johns

Edited March 27, 2016 by iJackSparrow

[TommyA10]

5 hours ago, The Stingray said:

 

Star Wars 8. Rogue One might do it. I'm never doubting SW again. Civil War won't come close, imo.
 

SW8 is as good of a lock for $200 million opening as it can be (It's not 100% sure but very close to it). If Vader is promoted heavily in Rogue one and actually has a decent role in it it could also break $200 million for the OW.

I don't think Civil War will do it, even with Spider-man. Around Ultron numbers is what I think at best. ($180-$190 million) 

[solaris]

Why are we throwing about $200m OW predictions for CW and Rogue One like it's nothing? If this weekend has proved anything, it's that $200m remains a very tought barrier to crack.

 

Not saying that either of those films can't make it, but I would hardly call it a foregone conclusion either. I'm thinking CW will have a $160ish opening. Rogue One I still have no idea. 

[The Futurist]

The problem here is that (some) people don't want to take into account inflation, 3D, PLF screens & I-Max.

 

The Dark Knight OW destroys this easily, the first Spiderman too and BvS and Katniss are probably on par, tickets sales wise.

And I probably forget other movies regarding adjusted opening week ends.

 

So yes, being somewhat disappointed by a 170m OW is fair because as time passes by, a 200M OW will be the new 150m (It probably already is IMO) just like 150m was the new 100m and so forth.

Once you reach a certain milestone, the paradigm changes.

It s the nature of this beast called box office expressed in dollars.

 

And let s face it, there s absolutely no other existing brands in the world that rival what a Batman/Superman movie represents in the minds of the geekdom and the GA, it was one of the most anticipated movie of all time, reuniting for the first time ever on screen two(well 3!) of the most iconic and old heroes of our time.

 

So yeah, 170m is a great, excellent number, but in context, disappointment is understandable.

 

That movie should have been a monster.

It is  just an angry cat, at best.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2016 by The Futurist

[Hatebox]

5 minutes ago, solaris said:

Why are we throwing about $200m OW predictions for CW and Rogue One like it's nothing? If this weekend has proved anything, it's that $200m remains a very tought barrier to crack.

 

The trouble is there's no consensus on what CW actually is. If people want to make its OW look good they'll call it a Cap film and compare its take to Winter Soldier. If they want to make it look bad they'll call it an Avengers film and bemoan the drop from previous entries.

 

Tonally it looks more like a Cap movie to me, but the marketing has made every effort to play it like an Avengers movie. And I can't blame it.

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2016 by Hatebox

[eddyxx]

Then again I also blame the marketing team. They shouldve never put Doomsday in that trailer or had that long scene with goofy Lex in the trailer either. THAT is what killed the buzz. Before that this movie could've hit 200m on OW. EVERYONE wanted to see the movie after the comic con trailer.

 

Joss Whedon said right before the first Avengers released that the first weekend is the marketer's job. The 2nd and subsequent weekends are his job.

 

Wasted potential. 

[druv10]

3 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

Maybe, but I could also see just go with $165-166m. No controversy and pretty decent chance the actuals end up higher in that scenario. 

It's gonna be 170M since it would set a new record for WB OW (DH2) whether BvS get it is another question.

[AniNate]

I think Civil War can out open this, especially if it gets Winter Soldier level reviews

Sent from my Z667T using Tapatalk

[Ent]

I personally think and have always thought that CW, aka IM4 with most of the Avengers, Panther and Spidey being valuable replacement to Hulk and Thor,  will open in the vicinity of AOU pushed by stellar ratings but have better legs pushing its total around $470 - $480M.  

 

But back to BvS.  

 

Since it is now likely to open around Harry Potter Deathly hallow part 2, it will be interresting to see how BvS fares against that movie and what film will ultimately comes on top domestically since foreign wise and worldwide wise, BvS won't even come close to Harry Potter last installment.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Ent

[baumer]

Guys are we really using inflation and adjusted numbers and everything else so that we can sit on one movie and praised the other? I mean if we really do that then I'm just going to pick some random movie from the 80s that made 120 million dollars and say you know what that movie made more in the Hunger Games adjusted. Adjusted numbers are fun and everything but the bottom line is money is money and if one movie makes 170 million dollars because it has extra surcharges that means people were willing to pay that money to watch the film in that format. So no matter what the Hunger Games made it's still made less than Batman versus Superman. Just like no matter how much money for example Return of the Jedi made in 1983 it still made less money than the Hunger Games did in 2000 and whatever year came out

[TommyA10]

1 hour ago, The Futurist said:

The problem here is that (some) people don't want to take into account inflation, 3D, PLF screens & I-Max.

 

The Dark Knight OW destroys this easily, the first Spiderman too and BvS and Katniss are probably on par, tickets sales wise.

And I probably forget other movies regarding adjusted opening week ends.

 

So yes, being somewhat disappointed by a 170m OW is fair because as time passes by, a 200M OW will be the new 150m (It probably already is IMO) just like 150m was the new 100m and so forth.

Once you reach a certain milestone, the paradigm changes.

It s the nature of this beast called box office expressed in dollars.

 

And let s face it, there s absolutely no other existing brands in the world that rival what a Batman/Superman movie represents in the minds of the geekdom and the GA, it was one of the most anticipated movie of all time, reuniting for the first time ever on screen two(well 3!) of the most iconic and old heroes of our time.

 

So yeah, 170m is a great, excellent number, but in context, disappointment is understandable.

 

That movie should have been a monster.

It is  just an angry cat, at best.

 

 

 

 

SW, HP, Spiderman, LOTR beg to differ. 

[eddyxx]

1 hour ago, a2knet said:

In China ZOOTOPIA's final gross (1.3-1.4B) is gonna be more than 2x of BVS (~600M).

Is Sad Ben in the emojis now?

[Napoleon]

7 minutes ago, Baumer said:

Guys are we really using inflation and adjusted numbers and everything else so that we can sit on one movie and praised the other? I mean if we really do that then I'm just going to pick some random movie from the 80s that made 120 million dollars and say you know what that movie made more in the Hunger Games adjusted. Adjusted numbers are fun and everything but the bottom line is money is money and if one movie makes 170 million dollars because it has extra surcharges that means people were willing to pay that money to watch the film in that format. So no matter what the Hunger Games made it's still made less than Batman versus Superman. Just like no matter how much money for example Return of the Jedi made in 1983 it still made less money than the Hunger Games did in 2000 and whatever year came out

They're desperate to label this movie as a flop. Snyder got the last laugh and it hurts 

[Gumby]

19 minutes ago, eddyxx said:

 

I may not have liked MJ1 but at least it had a coherent plot. BvS can't say the same.

Does a movie that generates this much discussion/argument bomb?

 

As massively screwed up as BvS is at times, it is still 100% more entertaining than MJ1.  There was nothing interesting about MJ1.  In BvS, even when it's bad, it has your attention and makes you wonder, "what is Eisenberg doing? Who is Eisenberg playing, it's not Lex Luthor"  "Why is Holly Hunter in this movie?" "What's with these dream sequences," etc.

 

MJ1 is just a dull slog to sit through.

[TalismanRing]

9 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

I think Civil War can out open this, especially if it gets Winter Soldier level reviews

 

 

Agreed.  Dergarabedian in USA Today said on March 8th that it was tracking better than BvS.  That was well before BvS reviews and just before the release of the second CW trailer with Spider-Man.

[CJohn]

4 minutes ago, eddyxx said:

Is Sad Ben in the emojis now?

 

 

18 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The problem here is that (some) people don't want to take into account inflation, 3D, PLF screens & I-Max.

 

The Dark Knight OW destroys this easily, the first Spiderman too and BvS and Katniss are probably on par, tickets sales wise.

And I probably forget other movies regarding adjusted opening week ends.

 

So yes, being somewhat disappointed by a 170m OW is fair because as time passes by, a 200M OW will be the new 150m (It probably already is IMO) just like 150m was the new 100m and so forth.

Once you reach a certain milestone, the paradigm changes.

It s the nature of this beast called box office expressed in dollars.

 

And let s face it, there s absolutely no other existing brands in the world that rival what a Batman/Superman movie represents in the minds of the geekdom and the GA, it was one of the most anticipated movie of all time, reuniting for the first time ever on screen two(well 3!) of the most iconic and old heroes of our time.

 

So yeah, 170m is a great, excellent number, but in context, disappointment is understandable.

 

That movie should have been a monster.

It is  just an angry cat, at best.

 

You are insane. 

 

I think 200M OW would have happened if Bale was Batman, but this was a rebooted Batman. And a sequel to Man of Steel. And it still beat every OW of TDK trilogy. This is a monster.

[Gumby]

14 minutes ago, eddyxx said:

Then again I also blame the marketing team. They shouldve never put Doomsday in that trailer or had that long scene with goofy Lex in the trailer either. THAT is what killed the buzz. Before that this movie could've hit 200m on OW. EVERYONE wanted to see the movie after the comic con trailer.

 

Joss Whedon said right before the first Avengers released that the first weekend is the marketer's job. The 2nd and subsequent weekends are his job.

 

Wasted potential. 

Agree completely.  You could tell immediately that Eisenberg was miscast and got Lex Luthor completely wrong and Doomsday looked like a cartoon.

[ZattMurdock]

1 minute ago, CJohn said:

 

 

You are insane. 

 

I think 200M OW would have happened if Bale was Batman, but this was a rebooted Batman. And a sequel to Man of Steel. And it still beat every OW of TDK trilogy. This is a monster.

A well received BvS would gross to $200m+. Hell, it'd make more money than anything but TFA domestically, it could even beat that WW. Not sure how this is even up for debate.

[CJohn]

Just now, iJackSparrow said:

A well received BvS would gross to $200m+. Hell, it'd make more money than anything but TFA domestically, it could even beat that WW. Not sure how this is even up for debate.

I don't agree. I think with good reviews it would have reached 180-185M OW but it wouldn't have touched 200M. It is just my opinion, of course.