EXCLUSIVE: Super ($200 Million) Man or Else?

From Claude Brodesser-Akner's City of Industry blog

Will Hollywood blockbuster budgets continue to fly "up, up and away?" Not necessarily.

At least, not at Warner Bros. Pictures. After a $225 million "Pirates of the Caribbean" sailed into port, taking the wind out of "Superman Returns'" $205 million Spandex, Warner Bros. executives are said to be circumspect as to whether the Man of Steel will fly again.

Talent agency insiders with ties to the film tell TMZ that Warner Bros. Pictures president and COO Alan Horn has informed agents that a sequel hinges on whether grosses of "Superman Returns" can crest the $200 million mark domestically. What's more, the studio plans to shave millions - many millions - off any "Superman" sequel's budget. (Amusingly, in the current "Superman Returns," Lois Lane pleads with Lex Luthor, "But millions will die! " It turns out she was right on the money.)

As Variety's box office guru Ben Fritz noted last July 4th, "Superman Returns is off to a strong start, albeit not as fast as a speeding bullet. Warner Bros. superhero tent pole grossed a solid $52.5 million on its opening weekend and $74 million over the five-day Fourth of July frame. Since its Wednesday opening, the Bryan Singer-helmed franchise restart has taken in $106 million."



Talent agency insiders, speaking on the condition of anonymity, insist that Horn is so concerned about being burned financially by ionospheric "Superman" special effects costs that any sequel's budget would cost far less than Bryan Singer's quarter billion dollar baby: a meager $150 million. That's a whopping $35 million less than its predecessor was green lit at, and roughly $55 million less than "Superman Returns" alleged final negative cost. So much for a getting a raise.

However, no one could blame Horn for being cautious. Despite opening at No. 1 in all its territories, overseas, the Man of Steel is starting to look just a bit rusty. The just-ended World Cup meant that Warner Bros. took a pass on European and Latin American territories, and its second weekend in release overseas, "Superman Returns" dipped 55% to take in $9 million from 1,800 prints in 14 markets.

We're bracing to hear how director Bryan Singer will react to this newfound fiscal restraint.


Our guess: Not well.

Says one executive involved in the production and financing of "Superman Returns," "They can try and spin it as 'There are certain economies of scale that come from the making of the first one, blah blah blah. But the reality is, it's harder to play in a smaller sandbox and still push the envelope."

Calls place to Horn were not returned, and a studio spokeswoman declined to comment on the fiscal retrenchment.

Tags: Alan Horn, AlanHorn, Superman

Relevant Posts

Reader Comments

(Page 3 of 9) Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

31. Pffft. I saw both SR and Pirates 2.

I nodded off during SR. And the final plot resolution completely destroyed my "willing suspension of disbelief" (I won't post a spoiler for the sake of those who haven't seen it) much like Chris Reeve's original Superman (I am willing to believe in a superhero from another planet, but spinning the world around to reverse time? Um, no.)

Pirates 2, on the other hand, was great. Already saw it twice, may go watch it a third time (to take my kids, this time : )

Posted at 11:45AM on Jul 12th 2006 by Scott Welton

32. What politics behind Superman Returns? This isn't about quixotic ideology. It's about a feral alien raised in a superneurotic, underachieving materialistic culture.

Let's be more honest with what we're dealing with here. It could make for some good satire if writers are involved who have some brains and creativity. This script blows. There was nothing wrong with the actors (except, perhaps, the actress playing the character Kitty, who sucked) and surely nothing wrong with the fx - it was the writing and direction that pulls the movie down. Teams of writers to come up with this lame story? I don't think the Superman francise needs to be Simonized with Christo-fascist mythology.

If we're talking about an advanced, highly intelligent alien culture, then why have its software so easily decrypted by a psychopath? It's just one of the things wrong with this dumb script.

Routh was aptly cast as Reeve's successor - regardless of what the naysayers say.

If Warner can't make a decent Superman flick they should retire the francise or sell it to a studio that knows how to deal with it. The producers must have been on crack when they developed this project.

Posted at 12:05PM on Jul 12th 2006 by John Doe

33. So many things are said about negativly about superman returns, the main point all come down to money. It's no long fun for director to make movies any more not like back in old days where special effects didnt mean awhole lot. Now most studios like warner brothers care about how much the movie is going to make in the first week. As appose to how much they spent making that movie. For me I saw this movie in imax 3D cause there was no other way that I'm going to watch superman returns any other way. I loved the movie in every aspect, even though the story was a little far fetched at times and your right there no one on earth who can take christifer reeves place as superman. He is and always will be superman and clark kent. I think bradon roth did did a good job as the man steel, It takes time to get use to seeing him in that role but it was good job on his part. I enjoyed kevin spacey lex luther, again hes no gene hackman but he did good job in role. And in some ways I would have like to see tom welling play superman, I think in some ways he fits the bill even more than reeve but it only wishful thinking.

In closeing there are couple of reason why superman didnt make as much as it should have. One is that there shoud have been more of story directed to tours superman home world of cripton, that is where he went for five long years. Another is that there should have been another villian in my opinion to challenge the man of steel, like brainiac, or bezoro. Maybe in part two if there is one. one more reason is that the timing of the movie was lousy, why would you open it when the following week pirates came out and blew the box office away. Theres where the real story is and why superman didnt make dew. It was just lousy timing on the part of warner brothers to realease that movie to close to pirates. I hope that the make a part two and I hope that they introduce brainiac finally into the picture. No matter what , I life long experience has been fullfilled with seeing the man of steel on the big screen.


J I N N

Posted at 12:18PM on Jul 12th 2006 by J I N N

34. I just saw the Superman movie last night and felt it was money worth spent. Routh did an admirable job filling the shoes of all the "supermen" before him. The special effects were a real roller coaster ride. The backgrounds and sets looked very realistic ( aren't they supposed to?). The storyline was typical Superman comic book fare. Spacy was surperb as Lex Luthor, a character worth hating. It was wonderful to see that Jack Larsen had a role in this picture, especially for us that used to watch the old Superman tv series in the 50's. He was the original Jimmy Olsen with George Reeves playing Superman. When you go to a movie you expect to be entertained and escape from day to day reality. I feel that this movie has lived up to all the hype. I would highly recommend it!

Posted at 12:23PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Vegassue

35. Superman Returns was a GREAT movie, and I'm sure that it will have no problem breaking $200 million domestically. It's gonna be a slow journey, just like it was for Batman Begins, but it will do it. This movie was great. I think it is a shame that some people don't like a good, character-driven story where the action serves a purpose, instead of an overly action-packed movie where the story backs up the action, like the awful x-men 3. I want a great story with well developed characters, and the action to back that up! I think this report is bogus; there will be a Superman Returns sequel! The only reason it is not raking in the big dough fast is because, like Batman Begins, this is a revamp of a dead franchise. The sequel will rake in the big bucks, just as Batman Begins' sequel will. By the way, over on www.imdb.com, they have 'untitled superman returns sequel' announced, with bryan singer at the helm and harris and dougherty back on board. Bryan Singer did a great job! I loved the entire movie, love story and all. Superman is back!!

Posted at 12:36PM on Jul 12th 2006 by James McDonald

36. I am glad some other people thought this movie was terribly boring. After seeing it, I couldn't believe how gusing some of the reviews were. I kept checking my watch during the movie...it was that slow.

I even found the action scenes to be unexciting. I am sure most of the budget was spent on flying scenes, and there were about 30 minutes too many of him just flying around doing nothing.

Posted at 12:36PM on Jul 12th 2006 by rsj8000

37. Superman was jusyt an ok movie. Acting, special effects were all good to great. The main problem was the script and subplots. What a bad choice having Superman having an illegitimate baby. What would have been more entertaining is a script with Clark and Lois getting married, then having children but with Clark still having to take off periodically to be Superman with Lois still not knowing his true identity . Lois of course is still infatuated with Superman because of all his heroic escapades. This script would provide lots of opportunity for humor. They need to remember that the audience for this type of a movie is 3-93 and needs to stay true to the morality, goodness and wonderment of past Superman's.

Posted at 12:38PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Karen

38. A budget cut isn't necessarily a bad thing- look at Star Trek 2. They had a fifth of the budget of the Slow Motion Picture, and made a film so stonking that Singer himself practically remade parts of it in X2, and certainly namedropped it in interviews.

With a film with such a huge budget you have to make sure you walk the tightrope between satisfying the hardcore fanbase and creating enough of an "event" to sell your big mac tie-ins, toys, and so forth; the problem with Singer's approach is his desire to make the "what-if" self-indulgent fanboy world in his head (hey-we'd all like to do it), a flaw that's also very apparent in the work of Alex Ross.

Still, we can all moan, but think what would have happened if this was McG's version, or the Nic Cage version, or the version where Superman fights polar bears. One pretty decent film with no sequel is a lot better than a McG franchise...

(Or maybe Singer will bail to be replaced by Brett Rattner[!])

Posted at 12:41PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Ewen Millar

39. Hey now...enough negative comments on my hero. I thought it was a really good movie. My husband and I got a kick out of some of the "larger than life" special effects...but that's how all Superman Movies should be...and that's how the comic books from the past were. My little boys' eyes were LARGER THAN LIFE too and that's why I say "GREAT JOB!" Our little buddies haven't taken their capes off or hit the floor since we got home! That's what it's all about...keeping that super hero feeling alive for the next generation. I was also amazed at the uncanny resemblance to Christopher Reeves. I told my husband "I wonder what Will Reeves will think? Everyone's entitled to their opinion but I say "Keep Your Cape on Clark!"

Posted at 12:41PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Kelley

40. The movie started out well but it turned into a love story and too much focus on the kid. Kate Bosworth is terrible and unattractive. Kevin Spacey is so irritating, horrible choice in casting, I wish he'd dissappear. It should have been a great summer action/adventure movie, not a love story.

Posted at 1:02PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Todd

41. I was extremely disappointed in Superman Returns. It was more of a love story than an action flick. Should've brought my wife. And Lex's plan was moronic. Kill billions to make billions and get away with it, I think not. The kid thing didn't bother me but, If you're going to put him in it, do a little more with him.

After Superman caught the plane, it was all downhill. I started looking at my watch. I'm not even going to touch the ending, which sucked.

Posted at 1:06PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Ernest

42. So... I liked the movie, but thought it was mediocre and kind of convoluted, I sorta agreed with alot of the naysayers. I just went and saw it last night again and it blew my socks off. I think Singer just put too much into superman returns for a person to take in in one sitting. You can't go in expecting an action flick with a quick resolution, it is something else entirely.

Another thing that hurt it, in alot of ways SR just does not follow the typical american plotline. The antagonist-protagonist situation resolves itself 5/6 of the way through and gives a stunning epilouge that leaves alot of loose ends. In Europe many movies occur this way, but in america we insist on everything tied up and ending quick...the death star blows up, we land, we get a medal. This can be a travesty to even pop culture, as the Harry Potter movies have lost much of their quality with how th endings have developed the slam bang tie up.

I hope Superman Returns does well, it is more about what superman is about, and the conflicts that causes... than about what Superman can do... A hero is not supposed to be a self serving pirate who sells out his friends... a hero is supposed to eb about our highest moral ideals... so in this world which doesn't have a superman, I think we need more stories about heroes like superman... sounds schlocky I know... but I would rather have kids watching superman and his morale dillema than a pirate who wins by deceit.

God I feel old saying all that.... but it just rings true in some way...

Posted at 1:08PM on Jul 12th 2006 by JSM

43. To the person who said Routh is the best Superman - you need to go back and watch Reeve's performances. Routh should be called SuperBOY in this movie. Reeve is still the ONLY Superman, as far as I'm concerned. Reeve was great in the role - he showed strength yet vulnerability, and comic ability, too. I think he was much too unappreciated as an actor, overall.

Superman Returns left be bored. The person who said there is no joy in this film is right on. Routh did an okay job, acting-wise, but Lois is so bland it's sad, and Spacey as Lex Luthor just leaves me cold. They should have quit before they even started making this film.

Posted at 1:08PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Laura

44. To the person who said Routh is the best Superman - you need to go back and watch Reeve's performances. Routh should be called SuperBOY in this movie. Reeve is still the ONLY Superman, as far as I'm concerned. Reeve was great in the role - he showed strength yet vulnerability, and comic ability, too. I think he was much too unappreciated as an actor, overall.

Superman Returns left be bored. The person who said there is no joy in this film is right on. Routh did an okay job, acting-wise, but Lois is so bland it's sad, and Spacey as Lex Luthor just leaves me cold. They should have quit before they even started making this film.

Posted at 1:12PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Laura

45. I was extremely disappointed in Superman Returns. It was more
of alove story than an action flick. Should've brought my wife. And
Lex's plan was moronic. Kill billions to make billions and get away
with it, I think not. The kid thing didn't bother me but, If you're
going to put him in it, do a little more with him.

After Superman caught the plane, it was all downhill. I started looking at
my watch. I'm not even going to touch the ending, which sucked.

Posted at 1:14PM on Jul 12th 2006 by Ernest

Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments