Thursday Box Office

[JackO]

Screw all of this, just give me Avengers and I'll watch it again.

It's like the ijack disease has infested other posters. Anyone may drop a novel in a thread at any given moment.

[Dementeleus]

Really, people? Some of you are going to boycott the next iteration of Batman films if they are not "original," just like you hate TASM because it's a "rehash"? Seriously...how original can you get with iconic superheroes? Sure, you could change the tone and the actors, and maybe tweak minor elements here and there, but every fucking version of Batman will be a dark, grimy tale about a Gotham millionaire orphan loner who dresses up as a bat, and most likely fights a man who paints his face like a clown. Every fucking version of Spider-man will be about a teenaged outsider who lives with his uncle Ben and aunt May, gets bitten by a radioactive/genetically engineered spider, and gets superpowers which he fails to use on a thug that ends up killing his uncle, and thus motivates the teenager to fight crime, and every fucking version of Superman will be about the last son of Krypton, who comes to Earth, is adopted by a nice couple in Kansas, and becomes the world's greatest superhero. Any changes made will be aesthetic and superficial, but it will always be the same ole stories. Let's not pretend that superhero films are original, because they are not, at least not the big icons. Not to mention that they almost always follow a very clear narrative arc. But by all means, continue peddling this unconvincing quest for "originality" in your Superman/Spider-man/Batman films.

I can't speak for anybody but me, but personally I won't be all that interested in another Batman origin story in 2-3 years, if WB chooses to go that route. It doesn't really have anything to do with originality.

[artist]

Not just RTX, unless you feel about Movieman, baumer and the rest the same way you feel about RTX.

The rest? Its only RTX and Movieman who insinuated that TDKR will crush TASM completely. The rest of the posts referencing TDKR were not in that context and certainly not in a way that you came out so defensively against "Nolan". Your post was clear aimed to incite the CJohns, Alfreds and the rest of the TDKR club. Too bad they havent taken your bait.

Link?

Different forum. Point is the numbers never were adjusted like you .. let me know if you still need a link and I'll give it to you.

And I'm pretty sure B would rather have those drinks with me.

Thanks for winning a hypothetical, bravo!

P.S. On a more serious note, please don't call me "son". Only one man could ever call me that and he's not with us anymore. So I'd rather you not call me that word, even in jest, thanks.

Only if you first stop being condescending and calling me a boy.

[ZattMurdock]

I can't speak for anybody but me, but personally I won't be all that interested in another Batman origin story in 2-3 years, if WB chooses to go that route. It doesn't really have anything to do with originality.

The thing about rebooted comic-book heroes — Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, etc. — is that they are just archetypes. Spider-Man is the everyman granted power who suffers a tragedy after failing to use said powers for good, thus learning, “With great power comes great responsibility.”

Batman is a young nobleman whose parents were betrayed and murdered by the city they wanted to help, driving his urge for vengeance against the evildoers plaguing the kingdom. Superman is — well, Superman’s a god: invulnerable, essentially omnipotent, can fly. Hard to get more archetypal than that. No wonder DC Comics and Warner Bros. are readying another Supes reboot in 2013.

As archetypes, they are adaptable to any time or circumstance with renewed relevance and power.

Tim Burton's “Batman” and dark, gothic Gotham reflected urban unease in the ‘80s; Joel Schumacher’s colorful campfests put Batman and his city square in the carefree ‘90s;Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, concluding with next week’s opening of “The Dark Knight Rises,” is a reflection on life in the post-9/11 age, a smart critique of the liberal order’s ability to react to an age of nihilistic terror.

Mr. Nolan understands this perfectly well. “Batman will outlive us all, and our interpretation was ours,” the filmmaker recently told Entertainment Weekly. “Obviously, we consider it definitive and kind of finished. The great thing about Batman is he lives on for future generations to reinterpret.”

Of course, studios don’t launch reboots and remakes just because they feed our primal hunger for new iterations of the hero with a thousand faces. They launch them because they make money.

“The Amazing Spider-Man,” to almost no one’s surprise, did just that, pulling in $140 million in its first six days. Its 2002 forebear raked in almost $115 million in its U.S. opening weekend and went on to make more than $400 million in domestic grosses.

Mr. Nolan’s first two Batman pictures have netted three-quarters of a billion dollars domestically — and surely will top $1 billion shortly after “The Dark Knight Rises” opens.

“The Dark Knight” set a record for the biggest box-office opening of all time in 2008, just as Mr. Burton's “Batman” did in 1989 upon its release. Even reboots that don’t spawn new franchises or shatter box-office marks do OK for themselves: “Superman Returns” limped to just more than $200 million domestically, a result that was disappointing but far from embarrassing.

These pictures are so lucrative and so reliable that it’s a safe bet plans are under way secretly to reboot the Batman franchise as soon as possible.

Obviously, superhero pictures are filling a gap in the marketplace: Critical weariness of reboots aside, audiences love them. We are starved for tales of unambiguous heroism, the sort of film that gives us good guys and bad guys and resolution, self-sacrifice and self-reliance.

When audiences tire of Spider-Man’s web-slinging, they’ll stop turning out. Until then, don’t be surprised to see a Justin Bieber-anchored, Wes Anderson-directed “The Spectacular Spider-Man” headed your way in 2022.

Source: http://www.washingto...d-faces/?page=2

See, as I've been saying to you for as long as I remember you and me exchanging posts: it's not about what you or me want, mate. You might enjoy or not the ride. I LOVE The Amazing Spider-Man more than any other Spider-Man film and it ranks among the best superhero films of all time for me. I'm looking up for the sequel and I CAN'T WAIT for a FULL Batman reboot with the vision that I think it's adequate for Batman. I can guarantee you that I'm not alone.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Chris O Donnell

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

..................Okay, some of you must thank Shawn that I'm not a mod.

http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ofa8OOxXwdI&feature=related

[Deathlife]

Didn't this film cost abou $220 million to make?Its already at $400 million worldwide (and counting) in just 2 weeks. How can anyone call this a failure????I'm pretty sure Sony be happy that this movie has performed solidly (for a re-boot that no one wanted).

Edited July 13, 2012 by Deathlife

[ZattMurdock]

http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ofa8OOxXwdI&feature=related

I always identified myself better with Bandit.

[Sims]

Didn't this film cost abou $220 million to make?Its already at $400 million worldwide (and counting) in just 2 weeks. How can anyone call this a failure????I'm pretty sure Sony be happy that this movie has performed solidly (for a re-boot that no one wanted).

It's much more than 220M. With marketing, I've heard anywhere from 300 to 430M. The WW box office needs to double the budget to turn a profit for the studio. It will probably be able to do that, but only just. A "failure" is pushing it but calling TASM a disappointment is grounded in reality. It's going to be tough for Sony to justify an equal budget on the sequel. Edited July 13, 2012 by Sims

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

The rest? Its only RTX and Movieman who insinuated that TDKR will crush TASM completely. The rest of the posts referencing TDKR were not in that context and certainly not in a way that you came out so defensively against "Nolan". Your post was clear aimed to incite the CJohns, Alfreds and the rest of the TDKR club. Too bad they havent taken your bait. :rofl:Different forum. Point is the numbers never were adjusted like you .. let me know if you still need a link and I'll give it to you.Thanks for winning a hypothetical, bravo!Only if you first stop being condescending and calling me a boy.

Wow...this all seems so familiar...and I wasn't intending to incite. I was joking around. I'm just as much a Nolan fan as anyone(anyone who was "here"(BOM) in 2008 and 2010 can attest to that). TDK is my favorite film. Inception is #3.And if you'd take a moment and look back, you'd see there was an entire conversation about TDKR crushing TASM's legs before I posted that.You seem to be pretty intent on fighting with me. I'd stop this right now if I were you.

[ZattMurdock]

It's much more than 220M. With marketing, I've heard anywhere from 300 to 430M. The WW box office needs to double the budget to turn a profit for the studio. It will probably be able to do that, but only just. A "failure" is pushing it but calling TASM a disappointment is grounded in reality. It's going to be tough for Sony to justify an equal budget on the sequel.

I believe that they can and should go even with a bigger budget.

[JackO]

It's much more than 220M. With marketing, I've heard anywhere from 300 to 430M. The WW box office needs to double the budget to turn a profit for the studio. It will probably be able to do that, but only just. A "failure" is pushing it but calling TASM a disappointment is grounded in reality. It's going to be tough for Sony to justify an equal budget on the sequel.

It is also pretty ironic since one of the reasons why Sony cancelled Spider Man 4 because of the bloated budget.

[Accursed Arachnid!™]

I always identified myself better with Bandit.

I mainly posted it for the "What we have here is a total lack of respect for the law!" line.

[ZattMurdock]

It is also pretty ironic since one of the reasons why Sony cancelled Spider Man 4 because of the bloated budget.

All I know is that Raimi ruined his own trilogy and I can't blame Sony for that. If anything, I thank Raimi for the first two films because I love them and the third because it opened the doors for what I see as one of the best takes on a superhero character.

[ZattMurdock]

I mainly posted it for the "What we have here is a total lack of respect for the law!" line.

I'm on it, but seeing the old sheerif made me giggle. Bandit is part of my childhood, I loved those films as a kid.

[artist]

Wow...this all seems so familiar...and I wasn't intending to incite. I was joking around. I'm just as much a Nolan fan as anyone(anyone who was "here"(BOM) in 2008 and 2010 can attest to that). TDK is my favorite film. Inception is #3.

Please save me the drama.

[Sin Graft]

Why don't you check the thread instead of asking questions people already know the answer too?

Why are you being so coy? Doesn't suit you really, as it's not your usual style. You're typically more forthcoming, to say the least. Leads me to believe you may be hiding something.

However, do not mistake my passing curiousity for actually caring 'bout the opinions of you Batties. Hence, I find the idea of sifting through the MoS thread for the answer(s) to my question a rather tedious prospect... 'cause I don't wanna know THAT bad! Therefore, your offer is respectfully declined.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Sin Graft

[JackO]

All I know is that Raimi ruined his own trilogy and I can't blame Sony for that. If anything, I thank Raimi for the first two films because I love them and the third because it opened the doors for what I see as one of the best takes on a superhero character.

uh...I find it odd that the biggest Spider Man fan around didn't know that Sony shoved Venom down Raimi's throat.

[artist]

uh...I find it odd that the biggest Spider Man fan around didn't know that Sony shoved Venom down Raimi's throat.

Dont insult AA, he's the biggest spidey fan here.

[JackO]

Dont insult AA, he's the biggest spidey fan here.

[ZattMurdock]

uh...I find it odd that the biggest Spider Man fan around didn't know that Sony shoved Venom down Raimi's throat.

I am a Raimi fan as much as the next guy. But putting the fault in a convoluted Venom appearance when that was the least of the movie's problems would be the same if Catwoman's appearance in TDKR turns out to be convoluted and blame the studios because Nolan decides that it's brilliant to make Bane's real name Joe Chill. Venom or even Emo Parker are far than the worst problems in SM3. Sony didn't put Sandman as Uncle Ben's killer down Raimi's throat. Raimi committed franchise suicide and I won't blame Sony for something that was clearly something that Raimi thought it was great but it wasn't.