411 Fact or Fiction Movies 06.30.06: Week 37

Posted by Matthew Craggs on 06.30.2006

JT and I talk Superman, Superman, Superman, Blu Ray taking over, Uwe Boll boxing his critics, snakes, and planes in week 37 of Fact or Fiction.

Greetings! This week we have JT, a guy who really, really likes Superman. He brings you Hidden Highlights over there in the wonderful Wrestling Zone, and may be remembered as the guy who recapped Byte This.

JT will be taking on me, because that's how I roll.

Now let's get it on:

1. Superman Returns will be the best film of summer 2006.

JT: Fact. Although, I say that because A. I am a HUGE Superman fan, and B. I haven't seen The Da Vinci Code. Cars was okay, but not something I can't live without. X-Men was decent enough, but it had Brett Ratner written all over it. I suppose I should say that not even Ratner could have completely dismantled a movie of that proportion that was already established. I'm straying though so let me answer the question. When I first saw the suit, and I first heard it was going to be based a lot more on the emotions of the characters, I thought "Dear God, what are they doing to my precious Superman!?" However, from what I've seen of actual footage, and what I've heard in terms of the storyline, I simply cannot wait to see this movie. Spacey looks BRILLAINT as Lex Luthor, and Routh is already raising eyebrows over his *completely unknown actor being handed a major blockbuster breakout role* performance. It looks amazing, it sounds amazing, and if the movie comes even close to the things being said about it, it will be the best film this summer. To be fair because I'm sure it will also be a smash hit, I'll say at the very least Superman Returns will TIE with Pirates of the Caribbean 2 for the best film.

Craggs: Fiction. Maybe it's because I'm not a comic book guy, and I don't have any special affinity for Superman, but I can't see Superman Returns as the best of the summer. Prairie Home Companion was so solid that I can't see any picture sweeping the honour from under it. But even without Prairie Home, The Da Vinci Code was solid (despite mixed reviews) and potentially worthy. A Scanner Darkly looks promising. The Descent has great buzz. I will agree that Kevin Spacey looks great as Lex Luthor, the trailers look promising, and the reviews have been great. It looks like a very solid picture but I can't help but believe there will be better films to come, and better films that have already came.

Score: 0 for 1

2. Superman Returns will help the Superman franchise more than Batman Begins helped the Batman franchise.

JT: Fact. And by Fact, I mean sort of a "push"... I mean both were dealing in almost mirrored circumstances. The first two Batman's were excellent, the rest were horrible. The first two Superman movies were great, the rest were laughable. So, from that perspective, they were basically neck and neck going into the rebirths. So, Batman Begins did what it was supposed to; make a ton of cash and get people re-interested in the character/franchise. Obviously that is what Superman Returns is designed to do, so I'm not sure exactly how we could define either movie as it pertained to "helping" the franchise. It was a gimme that both films would be huge; so I suppose the real test will be where they go with the sequels. If Singer makes two more masterpieces and Batman drops two stinkers, then I suppose the answer is Fact. But if both can continue strong I can really see no difference.

Craggs: Fiction. The circumstances surrounding the two franchises are very similar, but the difference is that while Superman was down in the dumps, Batman was really down in the dumps. Just look at Batman & Robin. It had horrible story, horrible acting, and horrible puns. It generated so much spite, and so many gay jokes, that the franchise was just that, a joke. Take Mr. Freeze's gang of ice skating sidekicks for example. Then Batman Begins came around, became a hit, and spawned a sequel that moviegoers are really looking forward to. Until Superman Returns the Superman franchise was down in the dumps, but that was so because there hadn't been a Superman picture in a while (even though, I know, the last two lagged). Plus, Smallville was still in the news and popular. Therefore, Batman Begins did more for its franchise than Superman Returns will, because Batman Begins took a franchise that was a joke and made it a hit again, while Superman Returns took a franchise that was lagging a little and made it a hit again.

Score: 0 for 2

3. Superman Returns will break the record for opening weekend box office.

JT: Fact. FACT - FACT - FACT - FACT; a MILLION times FACT. Again, this is the fan in me wanting the film to do well; but if they could Wednesday and Thursday in the "opening weekend box office", then I think it has a very good shot. The record is currently held by Spider-Man 2, which did just a shade under $115 million. That was a Memorial Day weekend I believe. If I had to guess, I would say that with the 4th being on a Tuesday, a lot of people are going to get their festivities in this weekend. This movie has also had a good amount more of publicity and advertising. I mean, they have people skydiving over major metropolitan cities in uniform holding massive "S" symbols for everyone to see as they fall. THAT is advertising. Point being, a lot of people have waited close to a decade for this movie to finally arrive, and I do not think wallets will disappoint. Hell, I'm going Wednesday... twice. Of course, that may have something to do with the bets I have with three separate people that it will break $125 million. …..gee, these answers haven't been biased at all…

Craggs: Fact. For all the reasons above, and IMAX. Not only will the film get the die hard fans, the crowd who will see any blockbuster in the summer, and casual fans who have heard all the good hype, but there is an audience of people out there who want to see an IMAX film, and what better film to see on the big, big screen than Superman Returns in 3D! That's as much a reason to see a film as any.

Score: 1 for 3

SWITCH.

4. Now that Blu-Ray discs have hit the market you are definitely going to buy a Blu Ray player by the end of 2006. .

Craggs: Fiction. But only because I am the type of person who waits on new technology until you can buy it at Wal Mart for under one hundred dollars. But will everyone else buy a Blu Ray player before the end of 2006? It's a little soon, but I don't expect Blu Ray domination to take much longer for no other reason than Blu Ray being backwards compatible. The difference between DVD and the formats before it is that DVD discs were hyped as a souvenirs. You were supposed to buy them, not rent them. Now most consumers have over a hundred DVDs and don't want to jump on a new format if it means tossing the current collection. Blu Ray technology ensures that your DVDs will be around long after you ditch the DVD player. Of course, there's the cost factor as well. But there is bound to be a significant price drop as soon as more of these things are shipped. Yep, December 12, 2007, that's when Blu Ray will take over.

JT: Fiction. I'm with Craggs here. My DVD player plays just fine. Do I really need to see if someone has a speck of a blackhead on their nose? "But wait, JT! It can record, too!". That's nice. My DVD recorder works just fine as well. This is just not an amazing technology that I'm particularly interested in, period. Will I eventually own one? Yes, but like Matthew said, I'll wait until people are done paying ridiculous amounts and the manufacturer's start dropping their price. Even then, either my DVD player or recorder will have to die for me to take the next step.

Score: 2 for 4

5. For offering to fight his critics and harsh IMDB users in a boxing match, Uwe Boll is a marketing genius. (link to story)

Craggs: Fact. Creatively speaking Boll is a huge failure. On the business side of things he's a genius. His films are cheap enough that they turn a profit and he gets his name out there, even if the movies are crap and he has no talent for filmmaking. He is the ideal candidate to pull a publicity stunt like this. Tell me Boll boxing some skinny young guy who uses the forums at IMDB won't get coverage on the "On the lighter side of the news" segments and boost the numbers for his next picture just a little bit. He won't make Superman bank, of course, but Uwe isn't in it for the big bank. He's in it for the little buck and ability to make the next video game flick.

JT: Fiction. It doesn't make him a genius - it makes him a crybaby. I found this particular part of introduction interesting as it pertained to Boll: "has often been the target of biting and venomous reviews despite the fact that all of his films have turned a profit once the final box office and home video receipts are tallied." Making money does not mean that your movies do not suck. I've only seen a couple of the flicks mentioned in that article, and they did – indeed – suck. Look, I'll agree with MC that it would be pretty funny to watch this guy go a few rounds with some skinny kid half his age, but it's still not going to make me want to see his movies; and more importantly, is not going to make his movies any better. But the ten minutes of entertainment this would provide is all this does; and if nobody takes his offer, it will just make him seem like a whiny jerk.

Score: 2 for 5

6. Even though Snakes on a Plane has received massive hype, it will underperform at the box office because audiences do not want to spend $11 on a bad movie.

Craggs: Fact. And I don't think the people who made the Snakes on a Plane picture will see it coming. Yes, there is insane buzz about this picture, but the buzz is based around how horrible it will be. As part of a double bill at the drive it may work. In the long long ago when movie prices weren't so high it may have worked. But these days? When it costs no less than ten dollars to get into a first run screening? No way. New Line Cinema is going to have to wait until DVD when college guys can binge on magic mushrooms during private screenings. And drink a shot everytime Sam Jackson screams "motherfucker." The fact is movie audiences want a sure thing when they go to a theatre and Snakes on a Plane is too different.

JT: Fiction. I would have said fact, but this movie cost $30 million dollars to make. This movie will make at LEAST $75 million dollars. That is a 150% profit after they get their 30 back. I don't care how much hype there is how many people everyone thinks is going to go see this, but 150% profit is NOT underperforming. MI:3 cost $150 million to make. You think if they made $375 million (remember, I'm speaking strictly domestic box office numbers), anyone would be saying "they underperformed"? In terms of how much buzz there is for this (such as our forums), it may disappoint a bit in terms of how many people actually go see it; but what counts is money, and this movie will not come up short.

Score: 2 for 6

Thanks to JT, who is damned fine people, for playing. Make sure to check back next week for more Fact or Fiction.