Now reaching over 783 million, Batman v Superman has surpassed Deadpool, GoTG and The Amazing Spider-Man at the box office. While some consider it a disappointment for not hitting a billion, I still think this is pretty good!

LINK

We're living in a day and age where Batman and Superman had to struggle to beat out Deadpool and the Guardians of the Galaxy D:

The only reason why it made so much money is because everyone is gonna go watch the movie if Superman is in it,where Batman is in it and not to mention how much people will come to watch the movie where the two will not only meet but fight each other.That movie isn't as nearly as good as Deadpool and Guardians of the Galaxy.

Probably wouldn't have been an issue if the movie was more well liked by audiences and critics. And if the advertising had better.

@nicksmi56: struggling? na..it's the 3rd week bro..the movie probably has 9 more weeks left for its cinema run..

@nicksmi56: I don't know about struggle. It did in three weeks what took Deadpool two and a half months to do.

Its not. It has only made $51m/24m domestic in its last two weekends and will top out at around $900m. It had no legs whatsoever. You as a fan may not see it as a disappointment but I guarantee that WB sees it as a huge failure. It had the potential to be a $1.5b blockbuster but died shortly after arrival.

It need to make around 800million to 900million at max to makes its money back according to various sources. Not to mention Deadpool was mafe with less then 100million dollar I believed, so while it making less, it will make more profit which is what really matter.

Granted I hope BvS does well for future and hopefully better movies and not an okay popcorn movie.

If the movie makes 900 million and is considered a failure, then WB had ridiculous expectations for the movie.

@theexile285: If a movie has to make almost $900m just to make a profit then its not so much expectations as it is the cold hard facts about how much blockbuster movies cost to produce, market and distribute. BvS needed to make around $1.2b to be a success and for WB to get back a reasonable return on their investment since studios only get around half of the box office take. The mcu for instance has budgeted $1b for both of the A:IW movies. We see $1b as such a big number but when you factor in ticket prices nowadays it isn't really that much. Movies like ET, Jaws and others in today's money were making nearly a $1b in just domestic sales with very little of an overseas audience. If they were getting equal ticket sales overseas they would have all been close to $2b+ movies. Today's blockbusters should be making over $1b, especially with how much money they cost to make and with the emerging markets in Asia and Europe for American movies. BvS making less than $1b would be an embarrassment for Snyder and WB even if they don't publicly admit it.

This is positive, but let's face real facts. This movie had a huge budget and spent much more in marketing than those movies did. Deadpool spent what around 150 in total? Batman v Superman spent like 400...

Deadpool didn't open in China though. Had it opened there, BVS wouldn't have outgrossed the movie.

I love BvS & Deadpool, GOTG not so much, at all.

Struggling? It beat it out in just over two weeks. It barely struggled.

That's assuming it would have did good. Many blockbusters don't do so hot in China.

It's not fair to compare films in between generations. Films released back than didn't face nearly as much competition as films now a days; there was no online streaming services, very few if any online free movie websites or torrenting, and overall just less competition in the movie theaters. Also, despite the population increasing, the American movie market hasn't really increased much at all. I highly doubt those movies would have done nearly as well now a days.

This is why I don't like comparing movies that are released now to any movie that came out before 2000. Even then it's unfair.

Don't argue...lol

No, not really. But then, people who seem to take a mulish delight in this movie's failings (and in pointing them out) will probably continue to believe as much regardless of what anybody says or how much money it ends up making.

@nicksmi56: It's definitely struggling...to beat a mediocre Melissa McCarthy movie.

I'm shocked *gasp*. Well Gotg was fabulous anyway. Deadpool I'm certain is a good film, once I watch it for myself in due time.

Yeah, I think these movies may have to be judged more on potential. I'm sure Fox is quite happy Deadpool did as well as it did. (FWIW, I hate the Deadpool character and will never see the movie, but I'm just one guy.) BvS..my goodness, had it been even a moderate critical success, (Say 62% on RT, IMDB score of 7.5-8.0) It'd have probably hit 900 million already. (This from a guy that still liked BvS despite knowing it wasn't as good as it could've/should've been.)

This and that's sad how much better Deadpools marketing was.

What sources are these? I have heard this a lot on these forums.

Isn't the real story here that BvS dropped the top spot in week three to a Melissa McCarthy movie that scored lower on RT, IMDB and Metacritic? Zootopia and Deadpool each held the number one position for three weeks prior to BvS. The Jungle Book comes out this weekend. It should have been the movie to dethrone Dawn of Justice, and that speaks to the dissatisfaction a significant number of movie goers have had with the film. The repeat ticket sales weren't there to maintain its lead.

@omnicrono: I'm not taking delight in BvS failing. I had fully expected it to be a huge success and make $1.5b. Now that we know it won't make close to that I am simply speaking regarding the reality of what it is. You can deny it making only $900m is an embarrassment all you want but that isn't far from its break even point for WB. You really think a movie which features both Batman and Superman barely making a profit isn't an embarrassment for both Snyder and WB? Movies like BvS are first and foremost made it make money. If WB spends around $600m(which is about what it will end up spending for production, marketing and all the distribution) to only make a tiny profit means it failed from a monetary standpoint and if it had been even a minor critical success it would have succeeded.

Sure, but it also very much speaks to the astounding defamation of the film done by the press and general media after the film's first weekend. In this day and age, I'd argue that an internet trouncing by critics does far more damage to a film, and far more quickly, than what the press were able to accomplish even a decade ago.

@makhai: http://deadline.com/2016/03/batman-v-superman-opening-weekend-box-office-records-1201726300/

That page has a break down of costs and revenue BvS likely has.

Not really. BvS did more in 3 weeks what those two did in its whole theatrical run. Plus if the reviews were actually, you know, good (like Deadpool and GotG) this movie would have made a lot more money

But that source says less than $700 million is needed to start making a profit and some of those costs aren't even current costs, but future costs. I hear some people say advertisement is what boosts it to $900 but I can see in this source that this includes P&A costs. I guess I am just trying to understand where this $900 million number comes from.

Yep, it's first and foremost about the money for the studio execs. That said, do you really think that during this day and age... after the internet skewering this movie received from critics during its opening weekend and beyond... that the WB execs will be embarrassed, actually disappointed, if this movie somehow still turns them a profit in light of the internet hate storm the film has been up against even before it began shooting? I don't know, man. From where I sit, I don't see those execs losing too much sleep over it. lol. Because again, as you pointed out, movies like BvS are first and foremost about making the studio money and not about whether the movie gets glowing reviews.

Will it be an embarrassment for Snyder? Maybe. You have no idea. I have no idea. It depends on how much stock Snyder puts in what his critics and naysayers think. Historically, he doesn't seem to care much about what either of those groups think.

I'll say this: it's clear that you think it's an embarrassment. That is all you needed to say.

So ....Batman and Superman starring in the same film together is struggling to beat out Deadpool and a talking Raccoon ?

Man it sucks worse than I thought . Will probably still push past a billion because of the same reasons every Transformers movies these days seem to cross the 1 billion mark :mindless drones that keep coming back for repeat viewings to wank to citywide mass destruction (not really sure why carnage and crashes seem to turn them on, and if so, should watch the much better James Spader starrer Crash ) and a devoted "fan base" that seems to pride itself in appreciating thrash. Also might get a slight boost from simply the names "Batman" and "Superman" in the title, though that does little to take away from the fact that the quality of the film is somewhat slightly lower than Transformers 2 and just above the second twilight movie

Saw it once because it's well ...Batman and Superman in the same movie . Total waste of time.

I will say, I think some (not all, but some) of BvS failings come from "the power of suggestion" so to speak. As much as folks believe they "decide things for themselves" we're all susceptible to suggestion. We were told it's bad, we go to it looking for flaws and discounting what we liked. Now, that's not to blame critics or audiences, a good way to avoid this is to make a film where the strengths overshadow the weaknesses and not vice-versa. For me, being a huge fan of Bats and Supes and even WW to a degree, they did, but obviously to folks not like me, it didn't. The whole "Martha" thing was terrible but in my view, was merely a small slice of a 150 minute film. For many it was the image that sticks with them. How they didn't decide to re-script thats scene is beyond me.

@makhai: The $900m is a number that was pulled out of thin air after at first it was stated that BvS needed to make $800m to break even.

@omnicrono: I do. I think the only thing that would keep Snyder from seeing it as an embarrassment is his own hubris and arrogance. Just as I keep seeing people saying how it was only critics who hated it and who sabotaged its box office appeal but the last 72k reviews BvS got on rotten tomatoes since the Wednesday before its official release gave it a 48% approval and 2.7/5 rating. It just was not a well received movie and it really doesn't matter if Zack and WB are embarrassed because what I am really saying is that they should be embarrassed imo by how it was received by movie goers.

Ah. Thanks for the clarification.

Deadpool didn't need a budget of $250 million to succeed or 2 of the most iconic characters in history. BvS boasted one of the biggest budgets of all time and had extra time to get everything right. Not too mention $150 million in advertising. This should've been one of the biggest CBM's of all time but instead it was a dud. You can make all the excuses you want for this film and deny the failure it is but the fact remains this movie wasn't even better than Deadpool.

It's pretty amazing how well batman v superman is doing considering how bad the reviews are and it's still making hella money..Everyone keeps crying about it not hitting a billion yet,but it's still knocking off marvel movies that had 80 %90 rating. Batman v superman has to be the only movie in history to make +800k with a % 30 critic rating while being bashed by regular people that appears to be professional movie critics/ apparent comic fans..lol.wb should be proud that the negative word of mouth isn't completely destroying the movie..that's a feat on it own..wb and zack needs to keep their head held high because the fans are still repeating their movie showings... despite the reviews

Yeah, I was always skeptical about that figure. Sure, the movie was expensive but I didn't think they needed that much to break even. $150-$200 million profit is still probably a disappointment in WB eyes, though.

Transformers: Age of Extinction = $1,1B 18% on RT

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides = $1B 32% on RT

Remember, our sources calculated that in order for BvS to turn a minimum profit in the theatrical window, it would need to do about $925M in global ticket sales. Link

Actually Deadline is very credible source with Box Office numbers/projections... Any of you guys have one better?

Deadline is the source that contradicts the $900 million figure by putting the total costs at $600 million.

If it didn´t beat them, that would be a complete failure.

You do know that show a movie in movie theaters has costs right?

Which I imagine are part of the 'participation' costs. Unless you are saying that Deadline is able to consider print and advertisement costs but forgot to include movie theater costs in a cost/profit projection. Wouldn't that call their reliability into question if you, some internet nobody, is able to make a more complete list than they can? What are your sources for this 900 million figure anyway? Because it clearly didn't come from the source you vouched for.

Deadline makes a lot of good box office examinations (Interstellar)

Batman V Superman Profit Projection THUMB STREAM COSTS REVENUE PROFIT Domestic B.O. $375M Foreign B.O. $450M China B.O. $100M Worldwide B.O. $925M Est. Domestic Rental $206.3M Est. Foreign Rental $180M China Rental $25M Global Home Entertainment & SVOD $260M Global TV $135M Total Revenues $806.3M Production Cost $250M Global P&A $165M Global Home Entertainment Costs $91M Participations, Residuals, Off-The-Tops $92.4M Total Costs $598.4M Total Profits $207.9M

Do you have a better article regarding B v S Box office projections?

@asgaard: LOL You aren't providing me with any counter-evidence. I was using Deadline for my argument. In a cost/profit projection, which includes projections from home entertainment costs, surely they know to include the costs associated with distribution in theaters. BvS costs are clearly stated to be under $600 million. You claim they are at $900 million. My claim aligns with Deadline, yours do not. Why do I need a better source when you are providing my source for me and then vouching for it? If you are going to claim $900 million and then say Deadline is credible, I expect you to provide an updated Deadline cost projection list that reflects your claim, not mine.

@asgaard: There is another one I found on deadline which states that if BvS makes $925m that WB will make $150-200m off of it.

http://deadline.com/2016/03/batman-v-superman-opening-weekend-box-office-records-1201726300/