- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Peacemaker Season 2 RT score: 100%, Gunn: “really, really, really big cameo”
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:20 pm to Madking
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:20 pm to Madking
Licensing fees, PVOD, merchandising, streaming, etc. There's so much more than just box office but that kills the narrative that these movies are flops.
Marketing is a completely separate expense that's paid for by ancillary revenues. Studios usually have a yearly total, let's say 500-600 miil, to market all their films for an upcoming year. I won't argue with you that 600 is an underwhelming total for Superman, but it's far from a flop.
Marketing is a completely separate expense that's paid for by ancillary revenues. Studios usually have a yearly total, let's say 500-600 miil, to market all their films for an upcoming year. I won't argue with you that 600 is an underwhelming total for Superman, but it's far from a flop.
2
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:22 pm to RLDSC FAN
Well that’s incorrect. Merchandise is a separate stream from box office but marketing is a direct box office expense.
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:27 pm to RLDSC FAN
What you’re doing is trying to create a separate standard for this movie exclusively. Not sure why, I’d guess some emotional motivation which is unproductive and irrelevant. The bottom line is there’s a threshold for profitability, especially in the context of this type of movie, that wasn’t close to being met. What would be interesting is if you guys would quit fighting these realities all the time so we could actually discuss what might be better ways to go with this stuff. I mean I’ve been posting on this board for a few years and I’ve gotten 1 box office projection wrong (Godzilla vs Kong 2) while I’ve been attacked by people who consistently get it wrong 90+% of the time. Also very strange and unproductive behavior.
This post was edited on 8/16/25 at 11:30 pm
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:31 pm to Madking
quote:
What you’re doing is trying to create a separate standard for this movie exclusively
No, I'm not. I've been arguing this for years on this board. Hollywood should be bankrupt if we go by the expectations of people on this board. Every blockbuster needs to make 800+ mil just to break even. It's silly
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:34 pm to RLDSC FAN
That would presume that all movie finance comes from movie profits but they don’t. The problem with connecting merchandise to movies is they don’t correlate. For example the Star Wars sequel toys didn’t sell according to TFAs box office or even TLJs.
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:35 pm to Madking
Fine, remove merchandise. Let's add product placement instead
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:35 pm to Madking
Honestly you and one other person on here are the only people I’ve seen saying it’s a “flop”. In fact I think the other poster said this needed to be between the 600 and 700 mark to make a profit. Which it is.
It’s an opinion I guess and that’s ok. I’d read a source that you have if you want to link. But you apparently seem to be on this “flop” hill alone.
It’s an opinion I guess and that’s ok. I’d read a source that you have if you want to link. But you apparently seem to be on this “flop” hill alone.
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:45 pm to abellsujr
I use the word because of what the movie represent which is what I said earlier. Barely scratching out a profit for a movie that’s supposed to uphold a large cinematic universe is a failure. The underling movies will make 30-50% of what this made. With the budgets it takes to make these how will the universe survive?
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:46 pm to RLDSC FAN
It sold 50 million fewer tickets than MOS so cultural impact is zero. This peripheral market you keep referencing doesn’t exist.
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:50 pm to abellsujr
I guess in theory he could have a big hit with a secondary character but even still the chances something like that can support the entire thing are extremely low. If Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman fail you have no DC. This movie proves it, like I told you the core Superman fans weren’t going to rewatch this movie and that’s what pushes the big blockbusters.
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:51 pm to Madking
I think there’s some concern about comic movies in general rn. So yes, the universe may not survive. But let’s be honest and real about the fact that the movie was not a “flop”. A “flop” would automatically be assumed to have lost money. Movie two will be a huge sign and may actually flop. We’ll see.
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:53 pm to abellsujr
Ok flop is the wrong term technically speaking.
Posted on 8/16/25 at 11:55 pm to abellsujr
What’s movie 2 Supergirl? See you can’t put that on this movie. The burden for SG shouldn’t be more than 40-50% of Superman but now we have to ask more of it. See what I mean, we’re playing catchup after 1 movie. That’s just not sustainable.
Posted on 8/17/25 at 12:01 am to Madking
Again you’re kind of going off in different directions 
It’s very simple. If WB isn’t making money, they’ll stop doing it. So relax.
It’s very simple. If WB isn’t making money, they’ll stop doing it. So relax.
Posted on 8/17/25 at 12:05 am to abellsujr
By directly addressing your statements? You should stop the passive aggressive nonsense, you’re not good at it. If you’re going to keep alleging someone else is being emotional you shouldn’t constantly post emojis.
Posted on 8/17/25 at 12:09 am to Madking
Yeah but you take my statements and run to the moon sometime with them.
All I said was the second movie will be telling on the fate of the universe. If it makes little to no money then we’ll know. But if you’re asking me why WB is going forward with the universe, idk. They like something about it I guess.
All I said was the second movie will be telling on the fate of the universe. If it makes little to no money then we’ll know. But if you’re asking me why WB is going forward with the universe, idk. They like something about it I guess.
Posted on 8/17/25 at 12:11 am to Madking
quote:
It sold 50 million fewer tickets than MOS so cultural impact is zero. This peripheral market you keep referencing doesn’t exist.
Just off the top of my head, companies like Toyota, dairy queen, prudential, the NBA. All these companies used Superman for promotional purposes. They don't get to use the character for free. WB makes a killing with these types of deals. Man of steel made huge revenue with product placement and this movie will too.
Posted on 8/17/25 at 12:13 am to abellsujr
quote:
All I said was the second movie will be telling on the fate of the universe. If it makes little to no money then we’ll know. But if you’re asking me why WB is going forward with the universe, idk. They like something about it I guess.
Zaslav has already announced Gunn’s working on the next movie that'll be about the super family.
Posted on 8/17/25 at 12:16 am to RLDSC FAN
Ok, Superman is the first mega hit that didn’t make $650 mil at the box office.
Posted on 8/17/25 at 12:17 am to abellsujr
I’m not asking why, a lot of this stuff has already started. I’m saying the outlook is bleak but they have a potential way turn it around.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News