comment #1

lesterg says ...

Looks like about 18.2, actually. That's a 15% increase from Friday.

Prada brought in 9.2M which is amazing. It's this year's "Legally Blonde".

comment #2

Dixon Steele says ...

Give it another weekend before you annoint it.

comment #3

NYCBusybody says ...

I liked Superman Returns, but an $84M five-day gross puts it behind the five-day totals of movies like Planet of the Apes (Marky Mark edition) and The Matrix Revolutions (the *gasp* third one). I just don't see how this can be deemed "very good".

comment #4

NYCBusybody says ...

In fact, seeing that Superman actually made an estimated 81M over the five-day, being beaten even by Jurassic Park 3's five-day opening, I have to say, I think Superman Returns has done exceptionally poorly - and dare I even say it, is in the process of bombing. Yes, it does have two holidays (Mon and Tues), but with Pirates 2 next weekend, this one is one and done. I thought it was pretty good overall, but mediocre word of mouth won't save it.

comment #5

jse says ...

The 5-day total of $84 million also puts it well ahead of Batman Begins start last year. So there.

comment #6

lesterg says ...

Call it a gut feeling - but after seeing Prada with a sold-out audience last night, I'm all but certain word of mouth is going to be solid. There's also NOTHING in the market that's similar until My Super Ex-Girlfriend hits later in July.

Even if WOM is catastrophic, the film will be profitable during its domestic theatrical run. That's something to crow about. I'm thinking high 80's to high 90's - but we'll see what next week brings.

In any case - with a thousand less screens and a total budget (including marketing) around 45M - Fox has got to be pretty happy with bringing in over 52% of Superman's three-day.

comment #7

Eric says ...

Anyone want to predict what Pirates 2 makes? Not that it matters, but Newsweek and the Reporter -- to a lesser extent -- panned it.

comment #8

Matthew Jordan says ...

Eric, I'm guessing that it won't matter - because look at what all the glowing reviews did for SUPERMAN RETURNS.

comment #9

Matthew Jordan says ...

jse, did Batman Begins have a holiday opening? I can't recall. And if it didn't, doesn't that put it about par with Superman Returns?

comment #10

lesterg says ...

Also, JSE, Batman cost 90-100M less than Superman (not even getting into marketing/previous development costs).

Fiscal irresponsibility is a bitch. If only WB, Singer, etc. had tightened their belts - we'd be singing a different tune right now.

comment #11

Jon says ...

Fiscally I think they did an okay job. It's just unfair that the 70+ million dollars that had been put into a decade's worth of failed attempts counts towards the final budget of the movie.... The movie probably only actually cost 190-200 million....

comment #12

lesterg says ...

Actually, I totally agree that the stalled production costs should not be counted against Singer's film.

However, I really think it was irresponsible for everyone involved to go north of the 120M (X2/Batman Begins budget) to 140M (Spiderman budget) on a franchise that's been dead for twenty years.

comment #13

Tom says ...

I didn't hate SR, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone – it just wasn’t interesting enough.

Right now, it has so-so word of mouth with many people talking about the fact that it's too long and not original enough.

$84.2 million in 5 days is not that great. It is underperforming despite all the hype.

And even though it reached that number faster than Batman Begins did, Batman Begins had great word of mouth, so it had fantastic staying power (I think that its receipts dropped by only 20% after it's first week).

I don't see the same being true for SR. I think that it will have a 45-50% drop off in receipts next week due to word of mouth.

comment #14

richard crawford says ...

Superman is witty fun. PRADA is poop.

comment #15

lesterg says ...

Very insightful, Richard. Thank you.

comment #16

Tom says ...

Prada is pretty much a DVD event for me and the only reason why I'll see it then is because of Streep and Tucci.

Superman Returns is about as far from witty as President Bush is from an intellectual powerhouse.

SR the standard summer movie no-brainer fare featuring tons of plot holes. Unfortunately, it is less fun and charismatic than a summer movie should be.

Somehow its special FX and character development never come together to make me happy that I spent money to watch this in a theater instead of just waiting for the DVD release.

And why did Lois Lane have more lines than Superman and Clark Kent put together??? Routh said about 100 words total during the entire 2 1/2 hours.

For a minute there, I thought that I was watching Arnold Schwarzenegger’s turn as Conan The Barbarian except that Conan was more entertaining than SR.

comment #17

Steven R. SIlver says ...

I'm with Jeffrey on this one.

Superman Returns is a very fast paced film that manages to balance the emotional with the comic book aspects of the source material. By avoiding wasting an hour on Superman's origin, it is better able to get into the story line. Bryan Singer is also very good at setting up the individual set pieces to add to the suspense. The special effects were about as well done as you can get with this type of movie, and some of them, such as the bullet-hitting-the-eye-in-slow-motion stunt were highly clever.

What made the movie for me was Kevin Spacey. He started out doing a slightly more over-the-top version of Gene Hackman's Luthor, but managed to turn it into something quite personal and sadistic towards the end. His display of genuine hatred (as opposed to Hackman's campiness which seemed a direct descendant of the villains on the Batman TV show) put into focus all the film's emotional elements. Seeing how much he hated Superman made the other characters' love for him far more credible and meaningful.

As far as Routh not having many lines, Superman has never been a man of many words. And Clark Kent would definitely not want to call any undue attention to himself.

comment #18

Tom says ...

Some media writers are already trying to spin the disappointing box office numbers for SR by claiming that WB's marketing campaign for the film was "all over the place" and never solidly targeted a particular audience.

Personally, I think that WB's marketing campaign failed in part because it decided to use its interest in TimeWarner to show Donner's Supermans I & II on it's cable outlets.

Donner's films gave us a fast moving plot, a compelling superhero that had WAY MORE than 100 words to say, and decent special effects that, for the most part, have stood the test of time.

All of those things were lacking in Singer's Superman Returns. Singer's version lacks life, excitement, and a genuine reason to sit in a cinema for over 2 1/2 hours waiting for it to eventually get good - which it never does.

I don't normally agree with a lot of Ebert’s reviews, however he was dead on accurate about Superman Returns.

When I left my showing last night, I overheard people complaining about the length of the film and the fact that they weren't really "feeling" any of the main characters.

If there is a sequel to this film, I think that people should be prepared for it to do wore than this installment.

comment #19

NYCBusybody says ...

My main problem with Superman Returns was that it really should have been called Lois Lane Returns.

Honestly, remembering back on the movie in my head, there's just a vague, swimmy notion that Supe/Clark was even IN the damn thing. I can't even remember Routh saying whole sentences, just bits of phrases.

comment #20

Paddy Garcia says ...

Seriously: WHO CARES if Pirates out-does Superman or vice versa? Unless you own Warners or Disney stock it will have no bearing on whether you have food in your fridge or a roof over your head.