|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 22, 2019 16:14:26 GMT
It's a "Batman Universe Movie", which equals to say that it belongs to the BATMAN FRANCHISE. Pure and simple. It's a DCEU movie featuring Batman villains and with Batman in a cameo role. It isn't a Batman movie. If they made a Sinister Six movie and Spider-Man cameos in that then that also wouldn't be a Spider-man movie in the same way. It made about as much money but was far less successful because it cost so much more to make. It also underperformed against expectations all around. The Batman movies have made five and a half billion to Spider-Man's six and a third billion. Spider-Man has grossed more money across a smaller amount of movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 22, 2019 18:47:20 GMT
It's a Batman Movie Franchise movie. Plain and simple.
The Batman movies have made five and a half billion to Spider-Man's six and a third billion. Spider-Man has grossed more money across a smaller amount of movies.
No man. Your calculations are wrong.
Total gross of the Batman movies:
$4,992,988,243
+
$746.8 million
Suicide Squad (no superheroes; Batman appears; featuring Joker and Harley Quinn, as well as other Bat-villains)
+
$657.9 million
Justice League (Batman as main character, Superman as secondary character - WW, Aquaman, Flash and Cyborg at that point still not having had solo movies)
+
Joker... 750 million dollars FOR NOW.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 22, 2019 21:37:18 GMT
No you're adding $1.5 billion worth from two movies where Batman makes a 2 minute cameo between them.
You don't need to do that with Spider-man. There's no need to find any loopholes or workarounds. His movies just make far more money.
Spider-man has only had one minior financial disappointment. Batman has had four, Batman Returns, Batman and Robin Batman vs Superman and Justice League.
Five if you also count Batman Mask of Phantasm.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 22, 2019 22:48:30 GMT
Forget the cameos. Forget them. It's not about the cameos.
SUICIDE SQUAD features Batman's villains as leads. They are not superheroes - standalone superheroes - they are BATMAN's villains.
JOKER is a movie focused on THE BIGGEST ARCHENEMY OF BATMAN and the Waynes (Thomas, Arthur & BRUCE), set in Gotham City.
Both belong to the BATMAN MOVIE FRANCHISE.
'Returns' was a stellar smash hit all around the globe. STELLAR. Disappointment or not. Forget expectations.
BvS was a huge hit. Disappointment, yes, but NOT a flop by any stretch of imagination.
Justice League grossed MORE THAN TWICE its budget, despite Warner's loss. I would say it was a minor hit.
"Batman & Robin" wasn't a disappointment. It was a FLOP. The only BATMAN flop along with CATWOMAN (2004).
Either Amazing Spidey 1 and 2 were regarded as HUGE financial disappointments. For instance.
Said that, Batman is simply more popular. SEE LEGO BATMAN, it quickly became a phenomenon.
The cumulative gross of the Bat-Franchise just surpassed Spidey's. That's it. JOKER is the final proof, almost 800 million dollars in few weeks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 22, 2019 23:04:28 GMT
LMAO.
Was Batman also featured on THE LEGO MOVIE as one of the leads?
The LEGO Movie
Domestic Total Gross: $257,760,692
Distributor: Warner Bros. Release Date: February 7, 2014
Genre: Animation Runtime: 1 hrs. 40 min.
MPAA Rating: PG Production Budget: $60 million
Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic: $257,760,692 54.9%
+ Foreign: $211,400,000 45.1%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
= Worldwide: $469,160,692
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 22, 2019 23:42:35 GMT
No you're adding $1.5 billion worth from two movies where Batman makes a 2 minute cameo between them. You don't need to do that with Spider-man. There's no need to find any loopholes or workarounds. His movies just make far more money. Spider-man has only had one minior financial disappointment. Batman has had four, Batman Returns, Batman and Robin Batman vs Superman and Justice League. Five if you also count Batman Mask of Phantasm. Six, you forgot Batman Begins, excellent movie but a financial failure at a combined $250m production and marketing cost for a movie that made far less than $400m, specifically Batman has been a 3 time money loser at the box office probably 4 if you count Justice League, but Batman & Robin clearly lost money as it made less than $80m more than it's iirc $160m budget, Batman Begins as I said combined $250m make and marketing and under $400m box office take, BVS lost $40m for WB with the theatrical run, and Justice League if you count it likely did worse, though like BVS I am sure all of those films made WB money back eventually through merch, TV and streaming fee's not to mention VHS & DVD/Blu Ray sales.
Hell considering Catwoman is included in the Batman franchise box office toll that also lost a shit load of money as it didn't even gross the $100m it cost to make the movie alone.
Batman is a tale of great success and failures in equal measure, Spidey is predominantly a tale of success, and a single noticeable failure.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 23, 2019 0:29:06 GMT
SUICIDE SQUAD features Batman's villains as leads. They are not superheroes - standalone superheroes - they are BATMAN's villains. So it's not Batman then. It's Batman's villains. Of course this goes entirely against what you said at the beginning with " solo superheroes" The Suicide Squad are neither solo nor a superhero. Joker is not a superhero. Which means Spider-man is actually the most profitable solo superhero then. Returns saw a massive drop off from the original to the point they had to completely change the style of the movie for Batman Forever to get people back. BvS made a lot of money but was not a huge hit as it only made $100 million in profit less even than Doctor Strange which did $120 million. If Justice League lost money then it's not a hit, which it definitely wasn't because it was a Justice League movie that made similar money to Ant-man and the Wasp. The first one did well enough to get a bigger budgeted sequel. It was only the sequel that was the disappointment but even that was profitable. That made a good chunk less than Spider-man into the Spider-Verse despite having the Lego brand behind it. [/quote]
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Oct 23, 2019 2:58:48 GMT
Batman is the biggest-selling comic book superhero in the world. And not only... Total gross of the Batman Movie Franchise minus 3 films:$4,992,988,243 + $746.8 million Suicide Squad (2016)
No (other) superheroes; Batman appears (and has a cool action scene); featuring Harley Quinn and Deadshot as leads; featuring Joker and Killer Croc. + $657.9 million Justice League: Batman & Wonder Woman (2017)
Batman as main character, Wonder Woman as co-lead. Superman is secondary character. Aquaman, Flash and Cyborg at that point still not having solo movies. + Joker
...almost 800 million dollars and COUNTING. No superheroes. Depicting the biggest archenemy of Batman as lead. Featuring the Waynes and both the origin stories of Joker and Batman. That's it, guys. not surprising.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 23, 2019 12:01:28 GMT
Madness. Dazzie, you're hallucinating again. C'mon, kid, Doctor Playstation is calling you. Don't ignore the call... BATMAN BEGINS according to FORBES:www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2015/06/15/batman-begins-perfected-the-reboot-and-saved-the-comic-book-movie-10-years-ago/Costed 150, grossed 375. You never count marketing in that, otherwise all movies would be considered flops LMAO. The DVD grossed $11.36 million in rental revenue.[77] The DVD held its position at the top of the sales chart for a second week, but fell to second place behind Bewitched on video rental charts.[78] The film had brought in $167 million in DVD sales by August 2006.[79] Batman Begins was released on HD DVD on October 10, 2006.[80] A Limited Edition Giftset of the film was released on DVD and Blu-ray on July 8, 2008, to coincide with The Dark Knight which hit theaters July 18, 2008.[81] Due to the successful box office performance of The Dark Knight, the Batman Begins DVD has since seen an increase in both sales and rentals.[82] Batman Begins was released on 4K UHD Blu-Ray on December 19, 2017.[83] In 2012, Kevin Feige, film producer and president of Marvel Studios, stated, "Chris Nolan's Batman is the greatest thing that happened [to superhero films] because it bolstered everything."[88] In 2019, Kyle Smith of National Review wrote that the film "set a new standard for its genre and has yet to be excelled by its many successors."[89] Filmmakers, screenwriters and producers who have mentioned Batman Begins or The Dark Knight Trilogy to describe their projects include: YEP. They are THE VILLAINS OF BATMAN and there is no other superhero (other than BATMAN) in both the movies. So they belong to the BATMAN MOVIE FRANCHISE. Cumulative gross. People watch these movies because they LOVE BATMAN AND HIS WORLD. Case closed, my friend, case closed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 23, 2019 12:04:20 GMT
THE 2014 LEGO MOVIE has BATMAN as only lead superhero.
More gross for the Bat. Poor Spidey, he bites the dust.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 23, 2019 19:40:58 GMT
It's true about Batman Begins, it didn't do nearly as well as it could have and they've always blamed Batman and Robin for that.
It's probably why it ended up doing so well on DVD over time.
Still those movies are about Batman's villains, not Batman so doesn't make it the most profitable solo superhero series.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 23, 2019 20:03:45 GMT
It's true about Batman Begins, it didn't do nearly as well as it could have and they've always blamed Batman and Robin for that. It's probably why it ended up doing so well on DVD over time. Still those movies are about Batman's villains, not Batman so doesn't make it the most profitable solo superhero series. was a hit. Not as big as it was envisioned, but a hit nonetheless. Those movies are not about Batman, but his villains and his world. So they properly belong to the Batman Movie Franchise.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 24, 2019 0:15:41 GMT
Those movies are not about Batman, but his villains and his world. So they properly belong to the Batman Movie Franchise. But you said Batman as a solo superhero. Including Suicide Squad and Joker when they aren't superheroes and Suicide Squad is a team goes against that. As a solo superhero his movies have made less than Spider-man as a solo superhero.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 24, 2019 12:27:52 GMT
Those movies are not about Batman, but his villains and his world. So they properly belong to the Batman Movie Franchise. But you said Batman as a solo superhero. Solo superhero with a FRANCHISE under his belt. Those movies feature his villians and NO OTHER SUPERHEROES. So they are about Batman's world. They are related to Batman and people watch them because they love Batman and his world, as well as his villains.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 24, 2019 16:04:57 GMT
Venom is related to Spider-man, people saw that because people like Spider-man and Venom is one of, if not his most popular villain. They even mentioned the possibility that Venom and Spider-man could meet up not long ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 24, 2019 18:59:55 GMT
Venom is related to Spider-man, people saw that because people like Spider-man and Venom is one of, if not his most popular villain. They even mentioned the possibility that Venom and Spider-man could meet up not long ago. The 2018 movie doesn't belong to the Spider-Man Movie Franchise. 1- Venom is a standalone superhero, not Spider-Man's supervillain (anymore). He is an accomplished superhero in the comic book world, starring in many self-named titles. 2- Cinematic Venom has NO relationship with Spider-Man. 3- Cinematic Venom has no spider-powers. 4- Cinematic Venom has no spider-logo on the chest.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 24, 2019 20:51:28 GMT
He's still a Spider-man villain. It's no less a Spider-man related movie than Morbius will be or Birds of Prey will be to Batman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 24, 2019 23:26:58 GMT
He's still a Spider-man villain. It's no less a Spider-man related movie than Morbius will be or Birds of Prey will be to Batman. He was a villian in the first years of its comic book life. Then, they turned him into a full blown, accomplished, super-popular standalone vigilante superhero. And there were several Venoms anyway... Said that... Cinematic Venom has no connections with Spider-Man. Heck, even the 2004 Catwoman had connections with the original 'Batman Returns' Catwoman.
|
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Oct 25, 2019 19:49:59 GMT
The only reason Sony is able to make a Venom movie is because he is a Spider-Man villain and the rights to put him in movies came with the rights to Spider-Man. The 2 are inseparable. They are one franchise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mutant 77 on Oct 25, 2019 22:25:56 GMT
The only reason Sony is able to make a Venom movie is because he is a Spider-Man villain and the rights to put him in movies came with the rights to Spider-Man. The 2 are inseparable. They are one franchise. Character rights are separated from conceptual visions behind movies. Comic Book Venom is an accomplished standalone superhero and Cinematic Venom is millions of light years distant from Spider-Man. We're not talking about Spider-Woman, Spider-Gwen, Electro or the Black Cat.
|
|
