Randoms

**Bayhem** · 03-04-2013, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by Albershide

Damn these journalists. They want box office facts? The Usual Suspects - $24 million - 4 times over it's budget. (Singer's best)
X-Men - $300 million - 4 times over it's budget.
X-Men 2 - $400 million - 4 times over it's budget. (best X-Men movie ever)
Superman Returns - $400 million - almost 2 times over it's budget. (many people hate this one but I love it)
Valkyrie - $200 million - almost 3 times over it's budget.
Jack the Giant Slayer made almost 1/5 of it's budget ($40 million) in it's first weekend.

We're talking about his big-budget movies. His smaller movies can't save him if his bigger movies don't deliver the $$$. That goes for all directors.

Fact is, "Superman Returns" is considered a box office disappointment. Warner lost money. The head of the studio talked about it. The expectations were huge, the budget was huge...and the movie end up making little over $390 million worldwide. That's really bad for a movie of this size. To put things in perspective, the first "Transformers" made over $300 million in the States alone.

"Valkyrie" did good worldwide but it was not hailed as a huge box office success. Some say the $80 million budget is actually a $100 million budget. Not to mention the money for marketing. After all, it was a Tom Cruise vehicle.

Thing is Albershide, the first few days are the most important days, box office wise. Ask anyone working in Hollywood. The first weekend is extremely important and it's a clear indicator of how a movie would perform. That's the reason it is duscussed so much and because of it people are able to make accurate predictions. "Jack the Giant Slayer" is following the "John Carter" pattern. It's very, very expensive and considering the budget and the marketing cost it'll have to make $500 million in order to be called a "success".

At this point though, $500 million is only a dream.

Originally Posted by Albershide

We all remember what Brett Ratner did!

Well, he directed a movie that made over $450 million and it still stands as the most successful "X-Men" movie. Just because the "X-Men" crowd hates it doesn't mean that all people hate it. It's a funny situation - the hardcore fanboys bash it and Ratner is laughing all the way to the bank. Kinda like Bay and "Transformers"...

**greensmoke** · 03-05-2013, 01:39 AM

but X-men 3 still sucks and Bryan Singer is still good filmmaker despite of box office numbers.

**Bayhem** · 03-05-2013, 04:07 AM

Originally Posted by greensmoke

but X-men 3 still sucks and Bryan Singer is still good filmmaker despite of box office numbers.

No one says that Singer is a bad filmmaker. Just because the facts (read "numbers") are sometimes against him doesn't mean that people bash him. And there's a difference between a "personal opinion/view" and "facts". It is a fact that "X-Men 3" is a successful movie (in terms of box office).

"It sucks" or "It's great" - that's not a fact. Never was a fact, never will be a fact. That's a personal opinion. Unfortunately some people on the web still think that "opinion = fact". Thankfully I'm older now and I'm not that ignorant. That's why when I talk about movies/music/books in most cases I keep my opinions to myself and I rely mainly on cold, hard facts to support my statements. And in this case, the box office numbers are the facts.

If Singer's new movie picks up speed then more power to him. But at this point things are not that good at the box office.

**Albershide** · 03-05-2013, 06:44 AM

No doubt that Jack the Giant Slayer will be a box office failure but still the movie will make over it's budget. What I meant was that Bryan Singer will be still a very wanted director after that. He is just too good to be ignored. I hope after X-Men DOFP he would return to small movies like The Usual Suspects.