This is Man of Steel.
Still not sure I’m sold on Aquaman right now, but I’m down for a fun adventure movie. And Aquaman does look like it might try to deliver that. Probably going to wait on reviews here to decide if it’ll be cinema worthy for me, but I’m sure I’ll check it out somewhere someday.
I am going to see this, if only to see Black Manta blow stuff up.
Wait… your assumption is that Aquaman will fail because they are attempting to make the character appeal to a widestream audience but only fanboys will go see it?
What if mainstream audiences like this Aquaman better than yours?
Yes. That is my assumption. And if they like it better I will be wrong…
Much like Thor, I think Surfer Bro Aquaman is the way to go. It’s a much more interesting take and balance than Underwater King Superman.
What if they make a movie with a character with depth who is fun as well! That would be awesome! But using my powers of evaluation with the evidence given so far I don’t believe it will do well. I’ve been wrong before and I’ll wrong again. But at least I won’t lose millions of dollars like WB keeps doing.
It would be awesome if WB got their act together, but I do think on what we’ve seen this is a massive step in the right direction. And to be fair to WB, they haven’t lost any money, they just aren’t making as much as everyone knows they should be based on MCU numbers.
I think they probably did lose money on Justice League judging by the budget estimates.
However others probably made up for it, very decent box office for Wonder Woman and Suicide Squad.
I didn’t realize that, I thought it ended between 100-200 million up. Was it a big loss?
Hard to say. Wikipedia has the budget listed as $300 million. If that’s just a production budget then there’s almost no way it made money. Even if did include marketing, it likely wouldn’t have made a profit with with a gross barely over twice the budget. General rule of thumb is a movie needs to make somewhere between 2 and 3 times it’s budget to make back its money.
This article discusses the profit threshold.
The film made US$658 million in the end, so likely they lost a little bit of money on it.
I would imagine they reached the black with home sales and promotional material within the movie. It should have made them a billion dollars. What a waste.
To be honest almost everything does eventually. I was reading some analysis on an indie producer that revealed all his costs in every detail and the film made less than two thirds of the budget on release but he was pretty okay about it because it was bringing in a steady enough annual income stream on DVD/TV etc that he’d hit profit in the end a few years down the line. DVD/Blu-Ray isn’t what it was 15 years ago where it often made more than theatrical release but it actually has shrunk less than you’d imagine.
The big pressure on the studios is the quarterly reporting etc. Making money back ‘eventually’ (as even Waterworld did) is not really good enough.
Have you had a look at the full movie, or just the trailer?
I never enjoyed the Avengers movies that much either.
I think, the same with the crossover comics, the main selling point is the gimmick of the characters being together, and the plot line is left behind?
They lost A LOT. These movies cost a lot more than they pretend. Avengers 2 was 420, the last two 500 each. JLA was in same ballpark (a pal of mine was an exec on it). Marvel’s huge gambles have paid off and generally DC’s too, JL and Green Lantern a couple of the only ones that lost incredible coin. But IT weirdly saved the day that year, the books still generally balanced.
This Aquaman swims through the air?
Not exactly. He’s caught and thrown.