Comments on: ‘Superman’ Going Back to Square One/Warner Bros. Wants Darker Comic Book Movies

By: Brad

Brad — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:08:20 +0000

Perhaps “too dark” is the wrong terminology, and I should have said “too dour/dreary.” I’m also talking about the impressions I’ve gotten from reading published reviews, talking to non-comics fan friends (ie “average” moviegoers), and reading reactions on general message boards. The general consensus seemed to be that SR lacked the fun, levity, action, and humor that many people expect from a Superman film, qualities that, for example, the Indiana Jones films, and even the Mummy pictures, have.

I also mention the overall box office take just because many people (and I’m not including you here, just potential readers) seem to have the impression that “Superman Returns” was a total bomb compared to “Batman Begins”, which is only partly true. In terms of pure ticket sales, SR came out on top, while BB was still the more profitable film. Still, SR was a disappointment, but it wasn’t quite the total failure, like say “Speed Racer”, that some paint it to be.

By: jeremy

jeremy — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:33:58 +0000

‘Superman Returns’ made $200 million domestic, another $191 million worldwide, which Warner Brothers doesn’t necessarily see most of. The film cost $270 million (additional development costs or not), so, even including foreign box office, the film profited about $120 million. ‘Batman Begins’ cost $150 million. It made $205 million domestic and $166 million worldwide. It profited $220 million.

I don’t understand how you can say ‘Superman Returns’ was too dark. I thought it was too light. The film focused more on the Superman/Lois relationship and even included Superman Jr. There’s nothing dark and brooding about introducing “the kid”. Look at ‘Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’. Look at ‘The Mummy Returns’.

By: Brad

Brad — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 06:31:26 +0000

For the record, “Superman Returns” actually made more at the box office than “Batman Begins”, but it was still considered a disappointment by the studio, who had “Spider-man” sized expectations for it. Expectations were much lower for “Begins”, with the Batman series still carrying the relatively recent memory of the “Batman and Robin” fiasco. SR also had the additional handicap of having its budget saddled with the additional development costs (over 100 million, according to some figures) of the ten years’ worth of prior Superman projects that never got off the ground, which basically made it nearly impossible for it to turn a profit unless it turned out to be the biggest hit since “Titanic”.

Nolan and WB did wonders for Batman, but the darkness is part and parcel of the character. What works for Batman doesn’t work for Superman. If anything, one of SR’s shortcomings was that it was too “dark” a take on the character already. The best thing WB/DC could do, rather than try to fit every character into the Batman mold would be to emulate what the successful Marvel films have done; understand the essence of the individual characters and what makes them work, and stick to it. What works for Spider-man doesn’t work for X-Men, or Iron Man, etc., and the same goes for DC’s pantheon.