@TLC:
Iron Man was the first movie that started the comic book movie craze with a C list character which the movie itself elevated into A list. The movie franchise landscape has completely changed since then especially with the 1.5 billion Avengers made in 2012.
Yes, mostly at the behest of Marvel making amazing connected films! And I don't know if you know this (I know you know this) but the Dark Knight trilogy and Man of Steel are nearly completely separate! As to are all the previous Superman films and MoS. Of course there's some service but you have to take into account any disservice too. This is a weak argument of popular character should automatically = 800 million to a billion worldwide. Yes, that's why Batman Begins, which was well received, made 800 million because Batman was in it right?
Most of the movies you listed were made in a different time with a fraction of the budget. The notion that the previous Superman movies somehow hurt the success of MoS is ridiculous.
The 3 most recent live-action previous Superman films ranged from "meh" to downright terrible and that has no bearings at all on people who might be considering on giving this next Superman movie a try? Sure, let's go with that.
No one even remembers Superman Returns, it was a blip that came one ear and out the other. MoS was marketed and expected to be a major, iconic film that defined the character and the DCEU by extension in a way that no other film did, a movie that could stand by itself, a movie that could reinvent the character for the current generation. It should have made a billion easily
Saying it should have made a billion easily is part of the problem as to why some people think this movie was a failure. Those unrealistic expectations based off of other unrelated movies except for the relation of the genre they're in. People don't build franchises off of flops. They do reboots hence why Superman was rebooted after Superman Returns and MoS came into the picture.
You're forgetting that cinemas in the US take half the revenues and the foreign markets take 75% (these are all approximate values of course). 225 mill budget plus marketing which yes is usually as much as the budget (there's nothing miraculous about it, it's standard practice these days for marketing=production budget) but let's be lenient and make it 150mill. So let's say 375 mill. The movie 290 domestic and 375 international. Let's be lenient and round them up so 150 mill domestic and 100 mill domestic so 250 mill…
And that was me being lenient (Of course it made more than that through promotional tie ins and merchandising but we're discussing the film on its own merits).
These numbers don't take into account home entertainment sales and rentals like DVDs and BLU rays, television rights, and product placement fees (but I guess you can take out product placement since we don't want to count that). Factor in the rest of the profit like you would properly for any other movie and Man of Steel without a doubt makes money. No movie is limited to just box office sales unless the DVDs are free or something.
But let's just take out the home entertainment sales and focus solely on Box Office, even then MoS probably still doesn't lose money because not all foreign markets take 75% of the profits. That number comes from China but the takeaway varies from country to country.
And Superman is the most iconic hero in popculture, a near mythological figure in US culture, plus the studio had just wrapped up a critically and financially successful franchise. And you actually think 668 mill is satisfactory?
Ummm…yes?
Anyway…
If the movie did as well as its opening weekend, it would have easily crossed 1 bill but it didn't. Because people didn't like it. This wasn't an issue of not enough interest, people were hella interested, they just didn't like what they saw and they didn't come back/told other people not to see it.
Here we go again. You know, if people didn't like it, it must mean nobody liked it. Pointing out people didn't like it is like pointing out that Henry Cavill is British. I mean, it's true.
Again, the comparison between BB and Iron Man doesn't work. BB was the movie that made comic book movies be taken seriously again after they nearly died in the late 90s. IM was the movie that put comic book franchises and cinematic universes on the map. You're making the wrong comparisons, MoS was released in peak comic book movie fever. It made a pittance and this is not high expectations.
Wrong, both movies were the start of their respective franchises and both movies were really well received. Yes, they were the beginning of something new but that does not take away from how much people loved them and yet their respectable profit is not being dumped on. Meanwhile, Man of Steel starts its own franchise and it doesn't cross into a billion like the Dark Knight, the Avengers, or Iron Man 3 and all of a sudden it's a failure. It totally should have done a billion because other unrelated movies in the same genre were made! Cool.
Maybe the wrong comparison here is pitting those movies up against Man of Steel.
Again, the talking tree movie made more money and this wasn't just because of the Marvel Brand, nobody at Marvel expected it to succeed because of how weird and out there it was but it was a huge success compared to expectations and it's because people liked the movie which is why GotG2 is gonna probably cross 1bill assuming it's as good as the original (or the comic book movie bubble hasn't burst by that point but that's another argument altogether).
It being part of the Marvel brand most certainly helped. It riding a wave of not only good will but having an entrapped and growing audience interested in the interconnected universe didn't hurt either. Plus, yeah, it was really good.
MoS was a failure, definitely in terms of franchise building and very probably financially. WB thought it was a failure which is why we got BvS instead of MoS2. It's your own business if you like it but the idea that it was not very successful is far from unsubstantiated.
I haven't been arguing about how much I liked it or how much you all disliked it. I'm arguing that it wasn't a failure, a flop, or a terrible start to the DC extended universe.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Robby:
It means a large chunk of the audience actively disliked it. Not "wasn't impressed" or "neutral", but came out really disliking it and not wanting anything more from the universe. An all ages decades old icon that half the audience hates is a not a good thing. The other half would have to absolutely love it to balance that out, and that's not the case. A few liked it, a few loved it. But it was no half and half by any means. It was mostly neutral, and with a lot of negative backlash.
I already touched up on the math with TLC and that's withholding promotional tie-ins (an estimated 160 million) which I did not factor in. But this audience opinion argument is not something I can even try to get into. Which is why I'm just saying opinions were split down the middle based off of reviews and reception. I cannot prove or discern how millions of people might have only "hated" or "loved" the movie and not just felt "neutral" about it, or "disliked" it, or "liked" it, or "thought it was just ok but wouldn't recommend it". This would quickly get into a terminology argument which I honestly don't have the language for.
If I remember correctly WB also put an absurd amount of marketing into it that didn't really pay off.
