Originally posted by Golgo13
Critics shmitics, the only critic I kinda like is Ebert.
That's fine but you by yourself can't buy enough tickets to make a movie successful. GL was obviously bad enough that less people went to see it compared to Thor and Cap. The bad reviews by critic contributed to GL's downfall since a large segment of the people does care what the critics have to say.
Critics voted with their reviews; movie goers vote with their wallet by seeing movies other than GL. If Superman had this kinda of performance against Iron Man 3, WB would close shop on movies other than Batman.
I personally found Captain America to be pretty boring. And it was by far my least favorite Avenger movie. And we can't deny that part of it's success would have been due to the success of Iron Man, Thor and being the last build up to the Avengers movie. Also generally if you ask movie goers who their favorite Avenger is (from the movie) Cap's the name that's least likely to come up.
So Hype and Marketing does have an impact on box office success. Cap for instance performed better than First Class. But anyone would be mad to believe that movie goers generally think Cap is a better movie than FC.
That being said as a movie Cap was far superior to Green Lantern in every way, and like someone else pointed out Cap did justice to the character and his origin story. That's something important that GL did not do.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I personally found Captain America to be pretty boring. And it was by far my least favorite Avenger movie. And we can't deny that part of it's success would have been due to the success of Iron Man, Thor and being the last build up to the Avengers movie. Also generally if you ask movie goers who their favorite Avenger is (from the movie) Cap's the name that's least likely to come up.So Hype and Marketing does have an impact on box office success. Cap for instance performed better than First Class. But anyone would be mad to believe that movie goers generally think Cap is a better movie than FC.
That being said as a movie Cap was far superior to Green Lantern in every way, and like someone else pointed out Cap did justice to the character and his origin story. That's something important that GL did not do.
Agreed. I didn't find anything fun about Cap. Sure it stayed true to the character, but that doesn't mean a good movie. At least GL had some fun parts to it. It actually made me laugh in certain scenes, but it lacked epicness, which GL should have been. I think MOS will do a lot better.
The real game for Man Of Steel is not Iron Man 3... It's Thor: The Dark World. Remember Snyder dissed Thor's 1st movie and came to make Man of Steel:
“[Superman] is the freaking […] biggest superhero on the planet. He’s the father of every superhero. [Deborah and I] were just talking about this – I’m like, really? Thor? Thor has a movie? [Laughter.] Really? I mean, come on. And there’s no Superman movie? This is, like, the world’s out of balance. It’s like, we’ve lost our minds here, people, come on.”
Originally posted by joesha28
I want Man of steel to be good. When Thor 2 comes out to hammer MOS out of the box office. Synder dissed Thor, and ironically Thor will be out in Nov. But once u touch an Avenger, U face the Avengers and Iron Man gonna blow MOS of 1st. Than comes the Hammer!
Good point. No one's even considered the possibility of Thor 2 beating MOS. (It's already embarrassing for Supes that Thor beat SR).
Thor made $450mill WW when Thor was a relative unknown. But after it's success and the mega success of Avengers a Thor sequel could be a rival for IM3.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERWith adjusted ticket sales I believe that sh!tty Superman movie out grossed Thor.
Good point. No one's even considered the possibility of Thor 2 beating MOS. (It's already embarrassing for Supes that Thor beat SR).Thor made $450mill WW when Thor was a relative unknown. But after it's success and the mega success of Avengers a Thor sequel could be a rival for IM3.