|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Jun 3, 2016 6:30:03 GMT -5
Why is Barbara Gordon blonde??? because something something hung up on your version something something. Everyone just assumed she was playing Barbara, is there any confirmation? Because that might as well be Cat Grant or Vicki Vale.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jun 3, 2016 6:50:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jun 3, 2016 8:08:21 GMT -5
And aside from that ridiculous overreaction on his part, there's also the fact that Batman v Superman isn't guilty of anything he didn't do to the Avengers in spades with his Ultimates series. The movie literally felt like something he would do with the characters himself. Hell, Snyder's amateurish rape-equals-drama tangent about Batman's origin sounds like something out of Millar's playbook, quiet as it's kept. Which is why it's not out of his playbook. In Millar's it would be talked about or shown in excruciating detail.
|
|
|
Post by xCompackx on Jun 3, 2016 8:19:53 GMT -5
Gotta say, the idea of a 3 hour Batman vs. Superman movie with the same bullshit ending sounds mind-numbingly boring. I'm sure the extended release offers more, but I don't see it changing opinions.
|
|
|
Post by sternrogers01 on Jun 16, 2016 4:14:57 GMT -5
The extended scenes from the Ultimate Edition are circulating on the 'net now.
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Jun 16, 2016 11:27:03 GMT -5
{Spoiler}{Spoiler} Turns out she actually played a STAR Labs employee, Jenet Klyburn.
|
|
|
Post by sternrogers01 on Jun 18, 2016 11:29:44 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 11:32:28 GMT -5
Overall it should finish with 872 million. It feels weird to think of a film that made almost 900 million a bust, but this should have made a billion
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jun 18, 2016 11:34:57 GMT -5
Overall it should finish with 872 million. It feels weird to think of a film that made almost 900 million a bust, but this should have made a billion Which is emblematic of the dark road that Hollywood has been headed down for awhile now, kind of like in the video game industry where certain games being million+ sellers can still mean they're a bust. At some point the bubble is going to burst.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jun 18, 2016 11:38:05 GMT -5
Overall it should finish with 872 million. It feels weird to think of a film that made almost 900 million a bust, but this should have made a billion Superman and Batman's first appearance together in the same movie and the first live action appearance of Wonder Woman since the 70's? This should have Easily made a billion.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jun 18, 2016 14:16:47 GMT -5
Overall it should finish with 872 million. It feels weird to think of a film that made almost 900 million a bust, but this should have made a billion Which is emblematic of the dark road that Hollywood has been headed down for awhile now, kind of like in the video game industry where certain games being million+ sellers can still mean they're a bust. At some point the bubble is going to burst. Agreed. As I've posted before, once all the deductibles had been taken into account Age of Ultron only started making a profit after it had hit $1.1 billion. That kind of business plan is just not sustainable in the long-term.
|
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jun 18, 2016 15:45:37 GMT -5
Crazy that Deadpool did better here then a Batman vs Superman movie
|
|
H-Virus
Hank Scorpio
A Real Contagious Experience
Posts: 5,962
|
Post by H-Virus on Jun 18, 2016 17:09:37 GMT -5
Overall it should finish with 872 million. It feels weird to think of a film that made almost 900 million a bust, but this should have made a billion Which is emblematic of the dark road that Hollywood has been headed down for awhile now, kind of like in the video game industry where certain games being million+ sellers can still mean they're a bust. At some point the bubble is going to burst. I think a lot of that problem stems from just how much money goes in to making these types of movies (and games) nowadays. I mean, Batman 1989 was made on a 48 million dollar budget and grossed 400 million. BvS's budget was five times bigger, but it only grossed twice the amount. When you look at it like that, it really does seem like a massive disappointment.
|
|
ronin705
Dennis Stamp
All Might
Posts: 4,277
|
Post by ronin705 on Jun 18, 2016 17:18:13 GMT -5
Jena Malone isn't Batgirl fyi, just a random scientist
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,249
|
Post by agent817 on Jun 18, 2016 17:48:10 GMT -5
Crazy that Deadpool did better here then a Batman vs Superman movie It was also a much better movie.
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Jun 18, 2016 17:49:06 GMT -5
Such a sad final gross. For a long time even the concept of a Superman/Batman seemed impossible.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,102
|
Post by Mozenrath on Jun 18, 2016 17:58:55 GMT -5
Crazy that Deadpool did better here then a Batman vs Superman movie It was also a much better movie. Agreed. Not even knocking BvS, Deadpool was just fantastic. It also spent its budget wisely, being far less expensive to make but not feeling that way.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jun 18, 2016 18:05:36 GMT -5
Which is emblematic of the dark road that Hollywood has been headed down for awhile now, kind of like in the video game industry where certain games being million+ sellers can still mean they're a bust. At some point the bubble is going to burst. I think a lot of that problem stems from just how much money goes in to making these types of movies (and games) nowadays. I mean, Batman 1989 was made on a 48 million dollar budget and grossed 400 million. BvS's budget was five times bigger, but it only grossed twice the amount. When you look at it like that, it really does seem like a massive disappointment. Besides the bugger production budgets, the money spent on advertising now compared to 25 years ago is insane. John Carpenter said that back in the late-'80s and early-'90s the major studios rarely spent more than $10 million on advertising, and even that figure was reserved for the biggest of blockbusters. Nowadays the average movie has upwards of $50 million spent on advertising as standard, with the blockbusters getting as much as triple that.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jun 18, 2016 18:30:22 GMT -5
It was also a much better movie. Agreed. Not even knocking BvS, Deadpool was just fantastic. It also spent its budget wisely, being far less expensive to make but not feeling that way. one of those ways... Angel Dust was originally written to be like 3 different goons they merged together.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 18:52:43 GMT -5
I think a lot of that problem stems from just how much money goes in to making these types of movies (and games) nowadays. I mean, Batman 1989 was made on a 48 million dollar budget and grossed 400 million. BvS's budget was five times bigger, but it only grossed twice the amount. When you look at it like that, it really does seem like a massive disappointment. Besides the bugger production budgets, the money spent on advertising now compared to 25 years ago is insane. John Carpenter said that back in the late-'80s and early-'90s the major studios rarely spent more than $10 million on advertising, and even that figure was reserved for the biggest of blockbusters. Nowadays the average movie has upwards of $50 million spent on advertising as standard, with the blockbusters getting as much as triple that. Wouldnt it be easier to just use Facebook, Twitter,Youtube to advertise? Cheaper as well
|
|