Box Office: ‘Suicide Squad’ Beats ‘Man of Steel’; Will Hit $300M Domestic

Enchantress

Despite the negative critical reviews, Suicide Squad has been performing quite well at the box office. DC’s biggest gamble made about $2.45 million on Friday, and now according to estimates, is set to surpass the entire domestic run of Man of Steel. 

Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel ended its domestic run at the box office at $291 million. A good number, but not the monster hit that Warner Bros. hoped that it would be. With the Labor Day weekend box office, Suicide Squad will inevitably leap over Man of Steel’s earnings.

The four-day weekend estimate for the David Ayer film is currently at around $13 million. This signifies that the movie will hit the $300 million mark. Who would have thought that this ragtag group of DC villains would have surpassed Superman himself at the overall box office? It is safe to say that the incredible marketing campaign for the film helped bring it to this number.

Negative reviews be damned. Even though Warner Bros. definitely would have liked this to have been a bigger hit both critically and commercially, they should be pleased that this unknown property has earned this much. Where do you guys think Suicide Squad’s box office run will cap at? Sound off in the comments below.

It feels good to be bad…Assemble a team of the world’s most dangerous, incarcerated Super Villains, provide them with the most powerful arsenal at the government’s disposal, and send them off on a mission to defeat an enigmatic, insuperable entity. U.S. intelligence officer Amanda Waller has determined only a secretly convened group of disparate, despicable individuals with next to nothing to lose will do. However, once they realize they weren’t picked to succeed but chosen for their patent culpability when they inevitably fail, will the Suicide Squad resolve to die trying, or decide it’s every man for himself?

Suicide Squad is in theaters now.

Source: Box Office Mojo

Noah Villaverde

Noah Villaverde

Cinema lover. Saxophone player. Coffee consumer. Chronic complainer. Oh, I also write. #TeamHeroic

  • Evan

    $$$315 domestic $$725 million WW

  • Marquis de Sade

    Yeah, but after all the money dceu spent marketin’ this turd, they’re gonna be in the negative until s.s. reaches the FX Channel in syndication 3 years from now.

    • bingeit 45

      are you an accountant at WB?

      • Vegas82

        No, he’s in marketing for Marvel.

      • SAMURAI36

        All these guys become armchair movie execs, when it suits their bias.

    • Matches Malone

      To date it has made MORE domestically than EVERY SINGLE MARVEL FILM that doesn’t feature Iron Man save GotG. So by your math, unless you work for WB, are 6/12 of the Marvel films in the red as well? Remember you are only getting 20 cents on each of those Chinese dollars, if that.

      STFU and let the films success be the films success. It’s financial returns don’t errode the bank Civil War made and won’t take money from Dr. Strange. Seriously man – stop grinding that axe as you do every time a DC story hits

      • Carl

        Most of the Marvel movies cost less than SS. I also suspect that SS cost more than they admit considering the extensive reshoots and competing cuts of the film. The marketing campaign for SS also seemed to be much more expensive, like on the scale of an Avengers film.

        • Peter James

          And I’m assuming you have some numbers or actual proof to back up any of that nonsense you’re spouting, right?

          Because “I suspect” and “…seemed” aren’t exactly the most concrete of foundations upon which to build your argument.

          • Carl

            Seeing as how we’ll never know what WB’s books look like all we can do is speculate. I’m not the only one saying it though. GoTG actually admitted to costing more than initially listed so it does happen. The marketing campaign for SS can easily be looked at as on the scale of BvS or Avengers as well.

          • SAMURAI36

            So, rather than saying “you don’t know”, you’d rather keep perpetuating other people’s ignorance? That’s awesome. Even more so, when you don’t know Marvel’s budgets either.

          • Carl

            Let’s just not have conversations about anything nor give opinions. That sounds like a blast!

          • SAMURAI36

            Yeah, how’s about we just say “the sky is green!” Wouldn’t that be fun? Or hey, how’s about someone just blurt out “the sun is a big ice cube in the sky”!! Yeahhhhh.

          • Carl

            But I’m saying things that are likely true that can’t be proven. So you can actually debate that. Your joke is saying things that are blatantly false.

          • SAMURAI36

            Except all of the things you are saying here, have already been debunked. But you and others here, keep holding on to these false narratives.

            You’ve been doing that for MONTHS now. Way back when I was trying to educate you about Geoff Johns, remember?

            None of you are even remotely informed about this, and when more qualified people report on, you guys ignore it. It just makes you look/sound all the more silly.

          • Carl

            What’s been debunked? The stuff we can’t prove.

          • SAMURAI36

            You’re talking nonsense as usual. There’s already been articles written on this subject, by the likes of Forbes magazine, about WB/DC’s marketing, licensing, and production budgets. Lengthy, well-written articles, that I’ve posted here more than once.

            You refuse to read them, because you want to hold on to the false narrative.

          • SAMURAI36

            But I’m saying things that are likely true that can’t be proven.

            Wow, you’re what I call, a hindsight comedian. This statement was so retarded, it’s not even funny. Except it is….. Or, is it? :-

          • JMMagwood

            Heh.

        • SAMURAI36

          Where is your proof of Marvel’s costs? I’d like the numbers, and/or links, please.

          • Carl

            Box Office Mojo and Wikipedia have production costs listed.

          • SAMURAI36

            Links?

          • SAMURAI36

            So, I just took you up on your bluff, and went to wiki myself, just to see if you’re telling the truth.

            Here’s Silly War’s marketing entry:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_America:_Civil_War#Marketing

            No where in it, does it so much as mention Silly War’s marketing budget.

            So, you’re lying. At least about Wiki. I’m off to call your bluff on box office mojo. Be back in a sec.

          • Carl

            What is Silly War?

            I never said they had marketing budget info.

          • SAMURAI36

            Your original statements were:

            The marketing campaign for SS also seemed to be much more expensive, like on the scale of an Avengers film.

            And:

            The marketing campaign for SS can easily be looked at as on the scale of BvS or Avengers as well.

            It was so nice, you had to say it twice. You were asked to provide proof of this statement, and you give me:

            Box Office Mojo and Wikipedia have production costs listed.

            You weren’t asked about the production costs. You tried to be slick, and backtrack and it failed. You’re a big liar, dude.

          • Carl

            Ha ha ha you’re silly. You were not specific so I gave you the answer to the production costs, which I also mentioned in that same comment. I also never said the marketing costs were definitively higher, it was clear that it was my opinion so a source wasn’t needed. I’m sure you also know that marketing costs are never made public. Don’t you think SS had a marketing campaign closer to BvS or Avengers, that crap was everywhere?

            Also what is Silly War? You keep mentioning it but can’t tell me what it is.

          • SAMURAI36

            Ha ha ha you’re silly. You were not specific so I gave you the answer to the production costs, which I also mentioned in that same comment.

            Wow, you really are a dishonest dude. I’ve watched you develop your dishonesty over the past few months, along the lines of the typical Marvel apologist. At first I thought you had a learning disability of some sort (I still do think that), but more & more, I catch you employing the same Marvel Zombie apologist tactics of deflection & lying.

            I quoted not one, but TWO statements from you. Other people here called you on those statements as well. That’s the reason this aspect of the “discussion” even got as far as it did. Why on earth do you think we need YOU, of all people, to direct us to Wiki for just the production budget? That info is common knowledge.

            You KNEW I (& others here) were addressing your marketing statement. The problem is, you pulled those statements out of your &$$, because you were trying to ride the whole “SS needs x-amount to break even” narrative, which, as I stated, has already been debunked several times.

            I’m sure you also know that marketing costs are never made public. Don’t you think SS had a marketing campaign closer to BvS or Avengers, that crap was everywhere?

            Stop trying to get me to co-sign your checks, Carlos. You refuse to educate yourself on this subject, & are content to belief whatever fits your anti-DC narrative. You are on the same internet that I’m on; you have the ability to find the exact same info that I have on the subject.

            Besides, this info has been discussed in these threads numerous times, since BVS. You don’t really want the info, you just wanna remain in denial. Good luck with that.

            Also what is Silly War? You keep mentioning it but can’t tell me what it is.

            Quit playing dumb, Carletta. I posted the link to wiki (that YOU directed me to, BTW) in my response. You know what I’m talking about, just like you know what I mean when I say “AoShit”.

          • Carl

            What’s Silly War? Never heard of AoShit either. I think you should work on your own issues before trying to diagnose others.

          • SAMURAI36

            You’re FOS, dude. You’ve been responding to my comments about AoShit for months, & now you don’t know what that means.

            You’re a big liar. I swear, I’m just a few responses away from blocking you. I detest liars.

          • Carl

            You should block yourself, you liar more than anyone I know on here.

            By the way, I’m just trying to aggravate you, like you try to do with those dumb Trump-like names. I know you meant Agents of Shield because that’s what we were talking about. But Silly War? I still can’t figure that out. Maybe if you could just type the movie’s proper name without a pathetic attempt to demean it.

            I can write BvS and SS without giving them a silly title because just seeing those abbreviations makes people cringe at the quality of their respective movies.

          • SAMURAI36

            You should block yourself, you liar more than anyone I know on here.

            Uhmmm, what? Take a step back from the keyboard, dude.

            But Silly War? I still can’t figure that out. Maybe if you could just type the movie’s proper name without a pathetic attempt to demean it.

            Figure it out.

          • Carl

            But you lie about me all the time. I like DC, you say I don’t. That is a lie, can’t you see that?

            Why can’t you say the real name of this movie you are trying to insult? It must be a Marvel movie because we all know how much you hate those. I bet it’s a really good one that got critical / audience praise and made tons of money. A movie that you can’t bring yourself to mention because it physically hurts you to think about how much better it is than anything the DCEU has produced.

          • SAMURAI36

            Okay so I’m back.

            http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=marvel2016.htm

            Do I need to explain why you lied about this as well?

          • SAMURAI36

            So…. Instead of recanting your statement, you just run away? That’s awesome.

          • Carl

            I gave you the answer you asked for.

      • Marquis de Sade

        Awwww, dceu fangurl’s caught all up in its feelins, huh? – Don’t worry, boo boo, one day dceu will break that billion dollar barrier…but you go head and celebrate their lil’ second time to cross $300 million domestically. Now dceu will have another barrier to break through, which is (to them) the “SEEMINGLY” insurmountable $400+million domestically…but in dceu’s case, ONE DECADE at a time, huh?

      • Rob

        Basically, you are making the argument that ensemble superhero movies make far more money than solo superhero movies with the exception if the solo superhero movies have Robert Downey Jr., Spider-man, Batman, or Deadpool in it.

        Plus, superhero movies are just grossing more and more money these days. Three of the last four Marvel superhero movies released are in the top 11 of all time domestic grossing superhero movies. Only Ant-Man doesn’t make that list and that was the smallest and most intimate Marvel movie ever.

        Not saying Suicide Squad is a bomb because it clearly isn’t. It did slightly worse than expectations based on the buzz, but overall was a success for WB especially after the disappointing results of BvS (just having both Batman and Superman fighting each other should have guaranteed a billion dollar run). I am just saying you might be spinning it a little too much.

        Let’s see how Dr. Strange does in November.

        • Matches Malone

          My response was more to the spin/ asinine declarations made by the O.P. You make a good point about ensembles but Suicide Squad did do better than Winter Solider, which had a few costumed co-stars and surpassed all the X-Men fims, doubling this years equal budget Apocalypse domestically, also ensemble films.

          I don’t think Suicide Squad did any better or worse than expected based on its budget and IP; I do concede that BvS should have performed far better based on the IP and it’s budget.

          I am not at all one to be down on Marvel as I love their films and have seen every one one opening night. I also agree that WB could be doing a far better job that would yeild greater success. Having said that I laid out the argument I did to fire back at the negative spin masters spreading statements of false information as though they are truth. ???

          • Rob

            I think you have a point about X-Men, but Winter Soldier far exceeded expectations. And that really wasn’t much of a team up since it really was a Captain America movie with Black Widow and Falcon playing supporting roles. That movie also didn’t really market it as it anything other than a Captain America movie.

            I think Suicide Squad did worse based on expectations though. Those trailers were killers. A lot of people were far more excited about that movie than BvS (myself included). Without the buzz and expectations of the trailers, I would agree that this movie either met or exceeded expectations. But I think the trailers and the excitement generated from them actually raised the bar quite a bit for the expectations for the box office as shown by the monster opening weekend (without that monster weekend, this movie would be a disappointment).

          • Matches Malone

            I don’t know man to say The Winter Solider “far exceeded expectations” seems a little disingenuous. It was an adaptation of one of the most acclaimed stories of a newly minted A list character coming off a beloved Avengers film. The film did financially great, and was critically fabulous, but it was expected to do both.

            By the same metric I think Suicide Squad is where it realistically and optimistically could be expected. I certainly hear what you are saying in that marketing was pitch perfect and generated more hype and perhaps started to influence where us lay people thought this film could go but it is, financially, where a positive estimate would have put it all along IMHO. Perhaps you are right and good reviews/WoM, coupled with the marketing would have afforded it the Deadpool effect. The Squad was never going to do what GotG did by virtue of its family audience alienating name and premise alone.

            I like using TWS as a competor because I LOVE it and TWS is universally held in high regard and considered a high water mark for CBMs. When the lens of the raw numbers are objectively looked at Suicide Squad gets credit for being the financial success it is.

          • Rob

            It isn’t being disingenuous at all. Winter Soldier did $714 million worldwide. First Avenger did $370 million worldwide. When a sequel almost doubles the box office of the original, it exceeds expectations.

            Before Winter Soldier, people considered Captain America a B list superhero. After Winter Soldier, he was A list almost on Iron Man level.

            Again, I am talking about the Suicide Squad based on the buzz of the movie. The fact that it could possibly out gross BvS at least domestically is a huge thing without taking the buzz into effect.

          • Matches Malone

            Yeah, I will be curious to see where it ends up. Adding 33 million domestically to pass BvS would indeed be impressive but I don’t know that it has that much more left in the tank.

        • SAMURAI36

          You’re still trying to spin BVS as a failure, huh? The film that has grossed more than 90% of all Marvel films (both Disney & non-Disney) to date? Good luck with that.

          • Rob

            It wasn’t a failure. It was a major disappointment. Team ups with major superheroes like this are judged on whether it hits the billion dollar mark. This is the first team up and first Batman movie not to make a billion since Batman Begins.

            In fact, if people go back and look at your posts from around this time last year, they would see YOU think it is a failure. You were crowing this time last year how BvS would easily make a billion dollars and out gross Civil War. It did neither. So it didn’t meet your expectations by a long shot.

          • SAMURAI36

            Just because I thought it would make a $B, doesn’t mean that I thought it was a failure. That’s completely ridiculous thinking.

            If I expected a paycheck of $2000, and only received a paycheck of $1150, does that mean I “failed” to bring home the bacon?

            How could a film that outgrossed 90% of the most popular films be considered a failure?

            I could see if it grossed $500M, but a film that grossed almost $900M is far from a failure.

            Use your common sense, man.

          • Rob

            If you make $1150 and you need $1500 to survive, yes you failed to bring home the bacon. Your analogy sucks. There is no context there.

            How could a movie that was one of the most expensive movies to make in movie history that made more than 90% of the movies out there, but failed to reach the billion dollar mark (which is basically considered the minimum this type of movie should do) be a failure? It wasn’t a failure, it was a disappointment. But to compare it to the other 90% of the movies is disingenuous.

            BvS cost $250 million to make and $165 million to produce. Only about 2-3 movies a year cost that much to produce and market. Those are the movies you compare BvS to. Not a $50 million comedy. And when you compare BvS to other movies that cost about the same amount to produce and market, BvS is behind a lot to most of them.

            BvS is currently 7th this year in top domestic grossing movies. That will likely drop after Rogue One (although it comes out mid December so I don’t know how they would count it), Fantastic Beasts, and possibly Dr. Strange come out later this year. But it is probably in the top 1-3 to make and market. That makes it a disappointment.

          • SAMURAI36

            If you make $1150 and you need $1500 to survive, yes you failed to bring home the bacon. Your analogy sucks. There is no context there.

            LMAO, first off, where tf did you get those crazy numbers? Granted, I’d said $2000, which was way off, but let’s look at the actual numbers:
            Assuming $1B was WB’s goal with BVS, then they only missed that by about 12%. So, going by my original numbers, if I needed $2000, but I missed that mark by 12%, then that means I took home $1760. By YOUR manufactured number, that means I only took home $1320.
            But you’re right, there is not context for that analogy. So here it is:
            Would I have failed to bring home the bacon (btw, there you go again, with the whole “failure” bit. First you said it wasn’t, now you’re saying it is. Failure or disappointment, which is it?), if, in addition to the money I brought home, I also happen to win the lottery every year, of $10K?
            Because that’s the point that you anti-DC folks keep overlooking, & remaining in denial about.
            Once again, this has to be restated:
            The beauty about comic book IP’s (& to some extent, franchises like Harry Potter/FB, Star Wars, & couple of others), is that even if those properties take a HUGE hit in the theaters, then the studio doesn’t lose much of anything, because of the HUGE amounts of money they make with licensing fees. These IP’s practically pay for themselves, & any money made in the box office is pocketed by the studio.
            Batman, Superman, & WW are, independent of each other, easily the top 10 highest grossing licensed IP in the world. Even if BVS’s budget (production & marketing) was $500M, WB makes that much in licensing for Batman ALONE, every single year. BVS was practically FREE for them to make. Just the Turkish Airlines, & Jeep product placement deals in the film alone probably accounted for about 1/5th of their budget.
            When WB did the aggressive licensing for BVS in Vegas last year, this was talked about. But folks like you were too busy hoping for BVS to fail, to pay attention.
            In fact, when my wife & I went to Vegas this pas summer, we went into one of the shops that had a whole bunch of Marvel merchandise, & I went in just to pick at the clerks therein. I was like, “what’s with all this Marvel junk? Where’s the DC stuff?” And the one clerk said “we’ve been trying to get DC in here for the longest, but DC’s criteria is that our store has to be able to prove that we can make $3M or more a year in revenue, & we’re not quite there yet”.
            At first, I thought, “wow, that’s a steep stipulation”. But then I thought about it from a business perceive, which is really all that matters, & it makes sense.
            The point is, DC is not hurting for money. The money they make on copyright infringement alone is staggering. Therefore, they can afford to take chances with their movies, & make noir films for the fans, because it’s not hurting their bottom line. Just the contrary, actually; they’re now almost $900M richer for the effort.
            It’s also why FF failed, because Marvel put a halt on the licensing for that film, just to spite Fox. Because of Marvel’s “Civil War” with Fox, they didn’t want to split licensing fees with them, & Marvel was willing to take a loss on their own IP’s, just to prove a point. This is also well-documented.

            How could a movie that was one of the most expensive movies to make in movie history that made more than 90% of the movies out there, but failed to reach the billion dollar mark (which is basically considered the minimum this type of movie should do) be a failure? It wasn’t a failure, it was a disappointment. But to compare it to the other 90% of the movies is disingenuous.

            I just explained it above. But wait…. So now it’s “disingenuous” to make this comparison, but it’s okay for YOU to make it when it suits you? Because you’ve been making comparisons of DC films & Marvel films in this entire discussion. So it’s cool when you make comparisons in favor of the pro-Marvel narrative, but when I point out facts & make comparisons for the pro-DC narrative, it’s disingenuous.
            This is the cognitive dissonance that I made mention of in a recent post. People like you, just can’t handle that the DCEU is thriving, despite all the obstacles thrown at it. In your minds, it’s supposed to be flopping, along the lines of FF & GB. But they are doing better financially than 80-90% of their major competitor(s), with only 3 movies in.
            I can see why that would vex anybody.

            BvS cost $250 million to make and $165 million to produce. Only about 2-3 movies a year cost that much to produce and market. Those are the movies you compare BvS to. Not a $50 million comedy. And when you compare BvS to other movies that cost about the same amount to produce and market, BvS is behind a lot to most of them.

            You’re not really saying here. Nothing that isn’t already known, but that is also devoid of additional facts, many of which I’ve touched on above.

            BvS is currently 7th this year in top domestic grossing movies. That will likely drop after Rogue One (although it comes out mid December so I don’t know how they would count it), Fantastic Beasts, and possibly Dr. Strange come out later this year. But it is probably in the top 1-3 to make and market. That makes it a disappointment.

            LOL, did you really just say Dr. Strange is gonna dethrone BVS? I foresee that film making $500-$600M at best. It’s getting very little buzz, & is the least trending comic book film this year on social media.
            See, when you make statements like that, you only further reveal your bias.

          • SAMURAI36

            Okay, so looking at all this in retrospect, the thing that really bugs me, is that people want to pick & choose when they want to compare DC to Marvel. They usually do so whenever it’s convenient to them, & opt to ignore said comparisons, when it doesn’t service the anti-DC narrative, but rather hurts it.
            Cases in point:
            Whenever the fact is brought up that the DCEU has grossed OVER $2B with just 3 movies, whereas it took Marvel an entire FIVE films to just barely reach that point, you hear nothing but crickets from the pro-Marvel, anti-DC segment. This was a narrative that didn’t even catch on. In fact, I’ve only seen a couple of official news outlets report on this.
            Another point: whenever people talk about the (so-called) lack of quality with DCEU films, the comparison to Marvel is out the window. The reality is, the first 3 (I’d go as far as to say FIVE) MCU films were varying levels of terrible. To the point of almost being unmemorable. Yet, this is totally overlooked, as Marvel fans (apologists) try to re-envision the Marvel narrative.
            Still, Marvel was allowed to evolve & grow as a franchise, which it didn’t officially do until Avengers. That was the pivotal moment for Marvel in that A) obviously, it presented the first superhero team-up, & B) it began to merge these wayward characters & their reactive stories together, wherein previously they had been only nominally connected. Which is why, for instance, when I mention how General Ross (the same character, & even the same actor) from the Hulk film is now the Senator in Silly War, people have to dog into the crevices of the of their recollection, to even recall what I’m talking about.
            And YET, these same people are QUICK to condemn DC to death, firing directors, rebooting the franchise & all other sorts of foolishness, while they too are trying to grow & evolve.
            For Marvel, their fauxs were a lesson to be learned from, whereas while for DC, their fauxs are a sin committed. For some reason, DC is given no benefits of doubt.
            Therefore, all of these conversations/debates about DC, are built upon a faulty premise.

    • Napi

      Just wait for Doctor Strange and cry when it earns less than 300 million worldwide xD LOL! It will be sweet

      • Darthmanwe

        It has the strongest cast in a superhero movie, maybe ever, so no, I think it’ll do fine.

        Plus, Cumberbitches will go in droves to that movie.

        • Napi

          Nonsense

        • SAMURAI36

          If it does $500M, I’d be surprised.

          • Darthmanwe

            It’ll do 500 mil on cumberbatch and cast alone. Plus the marketing ramp up leading to it. Believe me, this movie will make cash. This cast is simply outrageous, and I don’t think the movie will be bad, so word of mouth will carry it too.

          • SAMURAI36

            I guess we’ll see. But keep in mind, people thought the same thing about Ant-Man too, & we see how that turned out.

  • HG2012

    funny enough critics think man of steel is the best of the dceu and so do i yet it will be the lowest grossing one lol

    • Carl

      Similar to Batman Begins. Probably not the best of the trilogy but it’s damn close to TDK in quality. It made a fraction of the take though in the box office.

      • Rob

        Batman Begins is unique though. I think it came out at a bad time. People were still licking their wounds from Batman and Robin and superhero movies really weren’t considered the go to summer blockbuster movies yet.

        It has been a long time, but if I remember correctly, WB didn’t even do that big of a marketing campaign considering they were marketing Batman. It was a big campaign, but nothing like we see for superhero movies today or even The Dark Knight.

        And don’t forget that The Dark Knight had the curiosity factor of Heath Ledger and his posthumous performance.

        • Carl

          Yeah for sure. Suicide Squad is a huge beneficiary of the superhero boom we have today.

        • SAMURAI36

          And yet, the same doesn’t apply to MOS? People were still “licking their wounds” from SR as well. A movie that flopped, according to current industry standards.
          Also, don’t know why you’re mentioning Heath Ledger, when talking about BB.

          • Rob

            The Superman Returns part is true. Although Superman Returns was far more successful at the box office than Batman and Robin.

            But they benefited from Christopher Nolan having his name attached to the movie after his Dark Knight success and the superhero movie boom that happened after Batman Begins.

            One thing I also forgot is back when Batman Begins came out, the worldwide market really didn’t mean all that much at least compared to how huge it has become in the last five years or so. So at least that movie’s worldwide numbers were affected by that.

          • SAMURAI36

            You’re giving these caveats that don’t really affect the narrative. SR did well in the box office, but is largely panned as a Superman film, from a fan’s perspective.

            Ironically enough, SR did well with critics, but barely did well with the fans (61% on RT), while MOS got killed by the critics, and did well enough with the fans (75%).

            But, that only really matters, if you give credence to such things.

          • Rob

            How am I doing that? I just countered that Superman didn’t have a successful film since Superman III (which although was a box office success also was hated by most people). Superman Returns was a success at the box office to a certain extent.

            Yes, it wasn’t well liked, but there was supposed to be a sequel which was killed because it was delayed because Singer decided to direct Tom Cruise in Valkyrie first and then the Writer’s Strike delayed it another year. By the time they got around to the sequel, the entire comic book movie world had changed and they decided to reboot rather than do a sequel.

      • SAMURAI36

        Excellent point.

    • Rob

      It is even more funny that Superman (who is one of the two or three most popular and recognizable superheroes in the world) is going to be outgrossed by Deadshot, Harley Quinn, Killer Croc, Diablo, etc. (many of these characters are virtually unknown by the non-comic book fan movie goers).

      • SAMURAI36

        So is/was Deadpool, but that didn’t stop it from doing well.
        Also, this statement ignores the multimedia push DC in particular has been doing with their IP’s overt the past few years, prior to the release of this film.
        Killer Croc was Intro’d decades ago, by way of Batman:TAS. Katana & Boomer, were on DCTV. Harley is Harley; like the Joker, she needs no intro these days. And Deadshot, while he’s been rather low profile, the character had the benefit of Will Smith to carry the role.
        Sprinkle the Joker & Batman in the film, & it was a recipe for success.

      • SAMURAI36

        Also, people really try hard to overstate Superman’s importance for DC. True, he’s the most iconic character, but that doesn’t automatically translate into being the most popular.

        For the comics, Batman’s books outsell Superman’s by a HUGE margin. The fact that MOS only did almost $700M (plus close to $300M in video sales!! Not a single Marvel film has done that much), does not speak ill of the film. Superman will always have an uphill battle to fight, as it’s been difficult to make the character both interesting & accessible to fans. And that’s irrespective to MOS.

        Take into consideration also, that MOS came out, at roughly the same time as a few other major comic book films. It shared screen time with Wolverine, Spidey & Iron Man. With Marvel surrounding Superman from 3 different studios, it’s amazing that he did as well as it did.

        • Rob

          When you are talking about non-comic book fans, it does. A majority of movie goers are not comic book fans especially overseas and Superman is far more recognized and beloved than most superheroes. The problem (from a box office perspective) is that Man of Steel did not provide the character as they know and love him.

          • SAMURAI36

            You keep talking about “non/comic book fans”, as of that even remotely correlates to anything I’d said. Would it shock you to know that both Batman & Spidey out ranks Superman’s merchandising sales on a yearly basis? The same rule applies across the multimedia spectrum.

            Prior to MOS, Superman hadn’t had a “successful” film since Superman 3. That was 30+ years ago. The character does better in animation, than in live action. There’s a reason why WB/DC went in a different direction with Smallville, & that direction was hugely successful.

            Meanwhile, you can pretty much do anything with Batman, & bat-related characters, & it’s gonna be successful. We currently have a Batman show, that doesn’t even have Batman in it, & it’s doing pretty well.
            As beloved as Superman is, he’s still a harder sell than Batman is. You can do Batman in the future, Batman in the past…. Old Batman, young Batman, & it’ll sell like hotcakes. And that’s across mediums, both comics & non-comics.

          • Rob

            Huh?!? I am talking about how non-comic book fans make up the overwhelming majority if movie goers which impact the overall box office number more so than the fact that comic book fans (which make up a relatively small number of the overall movie going public) like other comic book characters over Superman.

            Superman Returns made $391million worldwide (2006) vs. Batman Begin’s $374 million worldwide a year earlier (2005) although domestically, Batman Begins made about $6 million more. So don’t say that Superman Returns wasn’t a financial success. It didn’t get a sequel because although a box office success, it was generally poorly received.

          • SAMURAI36

            We’re not even having the same conversation at this point.

            Not sure what aspect of “multimedia” you’re not getting. Comics are the basis for these IP’s anymore. They only loosely resemble their in-print counterparts, especially in the movies.

            I don’t know why you keep mentioning who’s a comic fan and who’s not. It’s not relevant to the overall scheme of things. While comics are indeed the catalyst for these films, they are by no means the be-all, end-all for them. For instance, BVS was heavily influenced by Injustice. The game influenced the comic, not vice versa.

            DC’s characters transcend any one medium. You can be a DC fan, and have never read a single DC comic.

    • SAMURAI36

      By comparison, people say that IM1 was among the nest Marvel films, & that is one of the lowest grossing ones as well.

    • Darthmanwe

      Franchise starters usually make the lowest amount of money, if the franchise keeps going on. That’s expected, since you build a fanbase over time to increase your return with each movie. That’s not rocket science, and that’s why WB is so hungry for bringing back Harry Potter and make DC movies bigger, since franchise going on == more money earning over time.

      Disney figured this one out a while back, that’s why they bought out LucasFilm.

      • SAMURAI36

        The sad part is, Disney bought a ready-made francishe with SW. Technically they bought one with Marvel as well.

        • Darthmanwe

          They built Marvel up. Marvel at that point only had 2 movies made proper, With Star wars…..

          See, people are not agreed upon it, but at the time of purchase from Lucas, SW was a somewhat damaged brand. Disney deciding to do one movie a year, plus integration with Disney properties such as the theme park extension was in part to repair the brand.

          • SAMURAI36

            Marvel had over a dozen films under the Marvel brand prior to the MCU. Most of them weren’t great, but they had varying degrees of success. And again, it wasn’t just a movie franchise that Disney bought, but rather all of Marvel multimedia.
            Speaking of which, SW was by far not a “damaged brand”. They had the Clone Wars TV show carrying the franchise, along with them releasing a couple of video games in multiple formats a year. Add to that, a slew of books, merchandising, etc, & Lucas raking in the dough. Granted, they didn’t have a movie franchise at the time, but they didn’t have that prior to the Prequels either.
            Now, the toys & video games have slowed down, & the current cartoon is nowhere as good as the one before it.
            The reality is, Disney has never really been all that great with multimedia. They never had a successful comic book franchise, which is why they bought Marvel in the first place (built-in comics media).
            They are hit & miss with their home grown franchises. For every successful “Dory”, there’s a failed “BFG” or “Tomorrowland”.
            When’s the last time you’ve clicked on the Disney Channel? None of that stuff is winning any awards.
            The Disney Infinity video game brand failed after less than a year. There were more Marvel video games before Disney bought them, than afterward, which is NONE.
            The fact of the matter is, Disney needed both Marvel & SW, than vice versa.

  • Marquis DC Sade

    More fantastic news! Now I can go on one more day without sticking my Mickey Mouse fork into an electrical socket and ending my hopeless existence. Visionary director Zack Snyder is going to re-tweet me today…I can just feel it. #stepdadgoals