‘Superman & Batman’ movie will follow ‘Man of Steel’

[Dream]

But after thinking about it, he might be ok. It will come down to the voice. If he can pull that off, he's good. If he does the Bale dog-barking thing, he's dead in the water.

Just my opinion, YMMV.

One of the things I didn't care for was Bales voice as Batman. At times it was alright when he was yelling at criminals, but most of the time it was annoying. I hope ben just does something simple with his voice.

Keaton had the best live action Batman voice. I wish Bale had done something similar instead of whatever the hell he did!

 

[Set Harth]

Affleck wouldn't be my first choice for Batman but it occurs to me; how could he screw up the role any worse than Christian Bale did?

I love when people screw up a role so bad that people start saying it was the best film in the genre.

 

[theenglish]

I read a very interesting article that suggested since this is ultimately a 'Man of Steel' sequel, Affleck probably wouldn't be blamed if the movie under-performs.

I still have to wonder about this news, does Warner Bros. not trust Henry Cavill to carry a MoS sequel by himself?

I think this movie is WB's reaction to MOS not being a bigger hit. It did well enough for a sequel, but not well enough to blow everyone's socks off. The mixed reviews certainly didn't help. They are throwing Batman into MOS2 to create more hype behind it.

The movie made 800,000,000 dollars world wide. How much bigger did they want it?

 

[the G-man]

Keaton had the best live action Batman voice.

Interesting, insofar far as his voice as Batman was digitally enhanced to make it deeper and more menacing. So wasn't really his voice. It was a computer's voice

 

[the G-man]

The movie made 800,000,000 dollars world wide. How much bigger did they want it?

Think Man of Steel was a huge runaway hit? Think again -- while it has made $650 million(!) worldwide, it actually needed about a billion dollars to break even. On top of the $225 million budget, they spent a mind-boggling $150 million on marketing. To help offset the costs, they sold more than $150 million in product placement, a move they claimed made the film about flying armored space gods feel "more real."

 

[Dream]

Keaton had the best live action Batman voice.

Interesting, insofar far as his voice as Batman was digitally enhanced to make it deeper and more menacing. So wasn't really his voice. It was a computer's voice

Your point? Bale's Batman voice still sounded like shit in TDK and TDKR. I wouldn't surprised if there was some "enhancing" going on in those movies too.

 

[Agent Richard07]

The movie made 800,000,000 dollars world wide. How much bigger did they want it?

Well over a billion or 1.5 billion. That's the new expectation these days.

 

[Dream]

The movie made 800,000,000 dollars world wide. How much bigger did they want it?

Think Man of Steel was a huge runaway hit? Think again -- while it has made $650 million(!) worldwide, it actually needed about a billion dollars to break even. On top of the $225 million budget, they spent a mind-boggling $150 million on marketing. To help offset the costs, they sold more than $150 million in product placement, a move they claimed made the film about flying armored space gods feel "more real."

No one actually counts marketing in a movie's budget, so that billion dollar number to beak even is bullshit. WB definitely was expecting MOS to be a bigger hit though.

 

[Aldo]

They may not count marketing in the budget, but they expect the movie to make back enough to pay for the marketing as well.

 

[Kelthaz]

http://www.dorkly.com/comic/53694/the-ben-affleck-conundrum

Daredevil is the only film that I've seen Ben Affleck in and I keep mixing him up with Ben Stiller. My hate is justified!

 

[Kelthaz]

The movie made 800,000,000 dollars world wide. How much bigger did they want it?

Think Man of Steel was a huge runaway hit? Think again -- while it has made $650 million(!) worldwide, it actually needed about a billion dollars to break even. On top of the $225 million budget, they spent a mind-boggling $150 million on marketing. To help offset the costs, they sold more than $150 million in product placement, a move they claimed made the film about flying armored space gods feel "more real."

I'm sorry, I think I might be seeing things here. Did you -- did you just source Cracked as a legitimate news source?

 

[Dream]

They may not count marketing in the budget, but they expect the movie to make back enough to pay for the marketing as well.

General rule for any movie to break even is that it makes at least double the budget. Anything more and it begins to make a profit.

If a movie makes three times the budget or more, than a sequel tends to get fast tracked into production.

 

[JarodRussell]

The movie made 800,000,000 dollars world wide. How much bigger did they want it?

Think Man of Steel was a huge runaway hit? Think again -- while it has made $650 million(!) worldwide, it actually needed about a billion dollars to break even. On top of the $225 million budget, they spent a mind-boggling $150 million on marketing. To help offset the costs, they sold more than $150 million in product placement, a move they claimed made the film about flying armored space gods feel "more real."

I'm sorry, I think I might be seeing things here. Did you -- did you just source Cracked as a legitimate news source?

Besides, that break even calculation is a basic example of Hollywood accounting.

 

[Trekker4747]

http://www.dorkly.com/comic/53694/the-ben-affleck-conundrum

Daredevil is the only film that I've seen Ben Affleck in and I keep mixing him up with Ben Stiller. My hate is justified!

It's also a non sequitur. Just because Affleck was good in one movie doesn't mean he's good in ALL movies or that he fits the idea of a character with 60-70 years of history and iconism to him.

Ben Afleck may have grown to be a good actor, I don't know I've not seen him in anything recent, but that doesn't mean he'd instantly be a good Batman.

 

[Gecko of Gorn]

^ Oh, I don't know.... Given enough time to prepare....

 

[JarodRussell]

Is this first time when actor has played both Batman and Superman on screen? Or atleast dressed up as both characters in movies.

Interestingly, Affleck was supposed to play Superman in Wolfgang Petersen's aborted Batman Vs. Superman movie.

What happened to Wolfgang Petersen by the way?

 

[the G-man]

The movie made 800,000,000 dollars world wide. How much bigger did they want it?

Think Man of Steel was a huge runaway hit? Think again -- while it has made $650 million(!) worldwide, it actually needed about a billion dollars to break even. On top of the $225 million budget, they spent a mind-boggling $150 million on marketing. To help offset the costs, they sold more than $150 million in product placement, a move they claimed made the film about flying armored space gods feel "more real."

I'm sorry, I think I might be seeing things here. Did you -- did you just source Cracked as a legitimate news source?

I know a writer for Cracked. While a humor site, he reports that they fact-check stuff like that fairly rigorously. Either way, it isn't the first time I've read about how MoS' budget was so high that the film wasnt as big a hit as you might think, just the most recent

 

[the G-man]

Keaton had the best live action Batman voice.

Interesting, insofar far as his voice as Batman was digitally enhanced to make it deeper and more menacing. So wasn't really his voice. It was a computer's voice

Your point?

Exactly what I said. Not sure why you seem to be treating it as a defense of Bale's voice.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Think Man of Steel was a huge runaway hit? Think again -- while it has made $650 million(!) worldwide, it actually needed about a billion dollars to break even. On top of the $225 million budget, they spent a mind-boggling $150 million on marketing. To help offset the costs, they sold more than $150 million in product placement, a move they claimed made the film about flying armored space gods feel "more real."

I'm sorry, I think I might be seeing things here. Did you -- did you just source Cracked as a legitimate news source?

I know a writer for Cracked. While a humor site, he reports that they fact-check stuff like that fairly rigorously. Either way, it isn't the first time I've read about how MoS' budget was so high that the film wasnt as big a hit as you might think, just the most recent

And, as I mentioned about 40 pages ago, before its release, WB were expecting a box-office take of well above $1bn.

http://www.newsarama.com/18039-man-...nd-high-stakes-for-their-dc-movie-future.html

Based on hopes like that, MOS' eventual take is probably seen as disappointing.

I do think that bringing Batman in is in hope of achieving TDK-style monies. Also, I suspect that they've cast a name actor as Batman to make up for the fact that the sequel will (presumably) be Costner and Crowe-free and maybe needs a little more name recognition factor.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

Man of Steel is still a bigger success than Superman Returns. MoS with a production budget of $225 million. Returns which had a production budget of $270 million. SR marketing budget I couldn't find. However SR only grossed $391 million worldwide. The fact that MoS was confirmed for a sequel in the weeks following it's release at SDCC means that WB was satisfied with the money it was making. Plus there are still dvd and bluray sales to tally up come November.