April 14th-16th 2023 Weekend Thread | $900K previews for Renfield

[John Marston]

3 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

If there is such a thing as people who think Batman Returns is the bad one, I have never heard of them.

 

Batman (1989) was a huge cultural zeitgeist movie and the sequel was almost guaranteed not to do as well. Not least because the cultural pace was moving incredibly quickly around that time and if something came from just a few years ago it was perceived as lame really rather quickly. Of course, Returns did have a big target on its back and there were arguments about the tone. 

 

But my understanding was that modern perceptions framed Returns as one of the very best.

 

Which, also, it is. Quite - to me, anyway - obviously. 

 

I mean I'm a 1. Returns, 2. Batman 66, 3. Batman 89, 4. The BMan, 5 Begins kind of guy. But I'm aware that TDK would be on average thought of as the number one by the general audience. But Returns would be fighting for number two alongside 89 and TB. Pfeiffer, Walken and DeVito are surely all iconic.

 

Uh modern perception among an internet fanbase maybe. Definitely wouldn’t top the Nolan films or the 89 film with the average person. Remember the internet  does not always equate to the general public 

[JohnnyGossamer]

4 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

If there is such a thing as people who think Batman Returns is the bad one, I have never heard of them.

 

Batman (1989) was a huge cultural zeitgeist movie and the sequel was almost guaranteed not to do as well. Not least because the cultural pace was moving incredibly quickly around that time and if something came from just a few years ago it was perceived as lame really rather quickly. Of course, Returns did have a big target on its back and there were arguments about the tone. 

 

But my understanding was that modern perceptions framed Returns as one of the very best.

 

Which, also, it is. Quite - to me, anyway - obviously. 

 

I mean I'm a 1. Returns, 2. Batman 66, 3. Batman 89, 4. The BMan, 5 Begins kind of guy. But I'm aware that TDK would be on average thought of as the number one by the general audience. But Returns would be fighting for number two alongside 89 and TB. Pfeiffer, Walken and DeVito are surely all iconic.

I wouldn't have been friends with this dweeb.

 

[screambaby]

Only batman movie pre b vs s I will never sit thru again is the one with Clooney

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

1 minute ago, John Marston said:

 

Uh modern perception among an internet fanbase maybe. Definitely wouldn’t top the Nolan films or the 89 film with the average person. Remember the internet  does not always equate to the general public 

Think the general consensus is the Burton ones have aged well and Schumacher ones have not. The Nolan ones, especially Dark Knight, are pretty respected. And, the latest one, The Batman, seems pretty well liked too. Batman honestly has had good flicks across multiple generations and actors. Pretty consistently delivers outside of Schumacher and Batfeck.

[John Marston]

2 hours ago, grey ghost said:

 

The box office was only considered a disappointment relative to Bstman (89) which was a pop culture phenomenon.

 

I mean Batman Forever was more successful also but I think BR would make more top 10 DC movie rankings today.

 

 

WB considered  Batman Return a flat out BO disappointment. There are many articles about this

[JohnnyGossamer]

I honestly think Batman and Spider-man are the ones that easily the most tried and true... They have had multiple actors and renditions are outside of the odd case people always come back for more. Awesome gallery of rogues and extremely cinematic. Hopefully Gunn can do that for Superman... We'll see though.

 

But, yeah, Batman and Spider-man are to superheroes at the box office as Super Mario is to video game characters at the box office. Just absolute top tier. It's almost hard to ruin either brand because they're all so big.

 

Being in my earlier teens when those Raimi Spider-man movies, especially the first two, released was something else. Those were HUGE. He captured something special there and audiences were in love. Great old fashioned pulp cinema too with those...

[wildphantom]

3 minutes ago, John Marston said:

 

Uh modern perception among an internet fanbase maybe. Definitely wouldn’t top the Nolan films or the 89 film with the average person. Remember the internet  does not always equate to the general public 

that’s fair, but my recollection is different than yours with regards to this particular film. The consensus was it was the better, more daring film of the two - and a real personal statement from Burton. It did have controversy though for sure, due to its violence.  
 

The reaction to Pfeiffer’s performance for starters was euphoric. 
 

It definitely wasn’t what people were expecting, but it had much love once the dust had settled. Much like the reaction to Back to the Future Part II the same year. Both have aged like fine wine as far as sequels go, trying to do something different. 
 

I totally understand that Burton is an acquired taste for many. Personally I love that he used a Batman film to make maybe the most Tim Burton of all his movies. 

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

15 minutes ago, John Marston said:

 

Uh modern perception among an internet fanbase maybe. Definitely wouldn’t top the Nolan films or the 89 film with the average person. Remember the internet  does not always equate to the general public 

 

 

My perception is not drawn from the internet. It's mostly drawn from having discussed pop culture with about twelve years' rolling of undergraduate students. 

 

Returns would be an easy number two for them, close to challenging TDK. But I would admittedly factor in that these are mostly students in performance and visual arts subjects who are drawn to aesthetics and camp and so might have an overrepresentation of love for Returns. Hence why I'll accept that TB and 89 might join in a wider pool. IMO Rises and Begins are only highly thought to that degrree either by people who were 13-18 when TDK came out and were completely obsessed with that trilogy OR by people who take Begins as Nolan's best and much prefer it to TDK.

 

Almost all the female UG's I've asked have a major preference for Returns. Due to aesthetics, lack of moodiness and obviously extreme girlboss.

Edited April 15, 2023 by Ipickthiswhiterose

[JohnnyGossamer]

1 minute ago, John Marston said:

 

 

WB considered  Batman Return a flat out BO disappointment. There are many articles about this

Of course they did, but it still grossed 163M DOM in 1992. That's still pretty big. Not sure with inflation what would be now but maybe something close to what The Batman just did maybe? Expectations were insane because Batman did 251M in 1989. Even beat out a very, very well liked Indy movie pretty comfortably that released that same summer. 

 

Admittedly, if it wasn't quite as weird and a little more like the first, maybe it does 200M DOM. But, it was always going to drop somewhat considerably. Nicholson's Joker was a HUGE hit with Batman. There was an absolute novelty to that movie too. I hear the older box office theorists like Baumer speak to the frenzy and insanity that movie created. It was enorumous. @250M+ in 1989 ticket prices is really, really impressive. That's an insane number of admissions. So, it was always going to disappoint at the box office. 

[Mulder]

8 hours ago, YM! said:

The Flash. You don’t open two kids movies together so close.

 

That and it opens in close proximity to TLM, Across and Transformers (which Beasts should also underperform) which all attract kids and are consecutive weeks. Indy 2 weeks later also means Disney will likely focus on that over it.

I think at this point we need to have a discussion on like 'kids' movies and 'all-ages' movies. There's a big difference in demographics and market there. Flash is an all-ages movie, it's not a kids movie the way Elemental is.

[WittyUsername]

30 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

It's a stretch to compare it to BvS as it was absolutely received better than BvS. At least by critics at the time... It's currently at 68 at MC and 81 at RT and I think a lot of those reviews are old reviews dug up from when its initial release. And, has aged better than BvS. I recall when it released pretty everyone at least loved Pfeiffer and DeVito... Especially Pfeiffer. I don't actually think there is a current comparison for BR with newer superhero movies. It really is its own thing.

It received a B on Cinemascore (same as BvS) and a common complaint was that it was too violent and unpleasant for kids, which led to WB going in a different direction for future movies. The parallels to BvS are definitely there. 

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

Just so we have it on record here for accuracy:

 

Batman 89 AFI: $577m

 

Batman Returns AFI: $359m

 

Batman Forever AFI: $388m

 

TDK AFI: $681m

 

DKR AFI: $516m

 

The Batman: $369m

 

Also to note the earlier films will have lower relative ticket prices so admissions despite AFI will still be relatively higher against their counterparts from later decades.

 

Having experinced both, I'd say Batman 89 was bigger feeling as a cinema experience, while TDK was a bigger feeling as a cultural zeitgeist moment. Batman 89 is what I'd give it to in terms of feeling bigger, but then I WAS a child so that might be a factor.

 

Also note, despite what may be the perception, Forever wasn't really any kind of big improvement on Returns - had a bigger budget too.

 

Also in my lifetime Lion King, Jurassic Park and Titanic would beat all of them, but Batman 89 would probably come fourth after those (note: too young for ET and too British for Forrest Gump which was perhaps that size in the US).

Edited April 15, 2023 by Ipickthiswhiterose

[grey ghost]

29 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

I wouldn't have been friends with this dweeb.

 

 

That boy was definitely not coached. 

[WittyUsername]

4 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

Just so we have it on record here for accuracy:

 

Batman 89 AFI: $577m

 

Batman Returns AFI: $359m

 

Batman Forever AFI: $388m

 

TDK AFI: $681m

 

DKR AFI: $516m

 

The Batman: $369m

 

Also to note the earlier films will have lower relative ticket prices so admissions despite AFI will still be relatively higher against their counterparts from later decades.

 

Having experinced both, I'd say Batman 89 was bigger feeling as a cinema experience, while TDK was a bigger feeling as a cultural zeitgeist moment. Batman 89 is what I'd give it to in terms of feeling bigger, but then I WAS a child so that might be a factor.

 

Also note, despite what may be the perception, Forever wasn't really any kind of big improvement on Returns - had a bigger budget too.

 

Also in my lifetime Lion King, Jurassic Park and Titanic would beat all of them, but Batman 89 would probably come fourth after those (note: too young for ET and too British for Forrest Gump which was perhaps that size in the US).

BF wasn’t that much bigger than BR at the box office, but I assume WB was at least relieved that they didn’t have to worry about it being too dark for a Happy Meal tie-in. 

[YM!]

20 minutes ago, Mulder said:

I think at this point we need to have a discussion on like 'kids' movies and 'all-ages' movies. There's a big difference in demographics and market there. Flash is an all-ages movie, it's not a kids movie the way Elemental is.

Part of it is a bit but point still stands about crossover.

[Deep Wang]

It is pretty hilarious thinking about Batman Forever being what it was as a reaction to Batman Returns.  

 

Forever is garbage of the highest order and isn't that much better than Batman and Robin.

[grey ghost]

12 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

Just so we have it on record here for accuracy:

 

Batman 89 AFI: $577m

 

Batman Returns AFI: $359m

 

Batman Forever AFI: $388m

 

TDK AFI: $681m

 

DKR AFI: $516m

 

The Batman: $369m

 

Also to note the earlier films will have lower relative ticket prices so admissions despite AFI will still be relatively higher against their counterparts from later decades.

 

Having experinced both, I'd say Batman 89 was bigger feeling as a cinema experience, while TDK was a bigger feeling as a cultural zeitgeist moment. Batman 89 is what I'd give it to in terms of feeling bigger, but then I WAS a child so that might be a factor.

 

Also note, despite what may be the perception, Forever wasn't really any kind of big improvement on Returns - had a bigger budget too.

 

Also in my lifetime Lion King, Jurassic Park and Titanic would beat all of them, but Batman 89 would probably come fourth after those (note: too young for ET and too British for Forrest Gump which was perhaps that size in the US).

 

It looks like Returns and Forever were equally profitable when you consider the budget.

 

But Forever probably sold more toys at the end of the day.

 

But Forever making almost the same as Returns kind of proves that any sequel would've made alot less than Batman 89.

 

Heck for the same reasons Spider-man 2 made less than SM1. You can't expect an increase after a pop culture phenomenon. 

[Mulder]

8 minutes ago, YM! said:

Part of it is a bit but point still stands about crossover.

I feel like whatever crossover there is so small and minimal that in a healthy summer (See JW and Inside Out) they'd be fine. Depends on how healthy or unhealthy this summer is numbers wise though.

[JohnnyGossamer]

4 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

 

It looks like Returns and Forever were equally profitable when you consider the budget.

 

But Forever probably sold more toys at the end of the day.

 

But Forever making almost the same as Returns kind of proves that any sequel would've made alot less than Batman 89.

 

Heck for the same reasons Spider-man 2 made less than SM1. You can't expect an increase after a pop culture phenomenon. 

Empire Strikes back and Temple of Doom too. Spider-man is probably the best example because it matches or exceeds the first in just about every way but still made a bit less. I think it did 373M DOM and the first did 403M DOM. Godfather under Godfather II as well.

[grey ghost]

8 minutes ago, Deep Wang said:

It is pretty hilarious thinking about Batman Forever being what it was as a reaction to Batman Returns.  

 

Forever is garbage of the highest order and isn't that much better than Batman and Robin.

 

I remember people going crazy over Forever because of the marketing blitz.

 

I was just disgusted with the movie wondering why they ignored Batman The Animated Series. 

 

You have the blue print for the perfect Batman movie right there!