"Aquaman" Will Cross $1 Billion at Worldwide Box Office

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
As a character who is best known for talking to fish, Aquaman has been the brunt of many jokes, but Warner Bros. and director James Wan are the ones laughing now: with its current earnings of over $940M, film finance experts say the aquatic hero’s silver-screen debut will cross $1 billion next weekend. (Despite starring the most famous comic duo of all time, WB’s Batman v. Superman “only” managed $873M.) Female audiences evidently loved the film, while fans credited Wan for creating a regal underwater world.

He’s a bigger deal overseas where WB officially reports what we’ve all been expecting for days that the the DC superhero has scaled to $940.7M WW with $681M overseas. Nancy reported that’s the best overseas haul for a DC pic abroad. On a global basis Aquaman is ahead of DC’s Batman v. Superman ($873.6M), Sony/Marvel’s Venom ($855M), Warners/DC’s Wonder Woman ($821.8M), and Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 ($863.7M). Film finance sources believe it’s inevitable that Aquaman crosses $1 billion next weekend.
 
After so many flops, I feel like DC Universe needed a hit somewhere in among those flops to keep going.
 
The fact that they accentuated Jason Momoa's bulge instead of hiding it is super popular with all my girl friends and fellow gay guys. It's a sucky trend in superheroes films where guys have to be sexless dolls.
 
I saw it with my wife (she asked me to see it, hmmm...) Anyway, it was an OK super hero movie. I thought the movie was a tad too long. I was hoping they would hurry the hell up towards the end of it.
There really wasn't a lot of competition this holiday season. The only other movie I had any interest in was Spiderverse - but I decided I'd just catch that at home later this year.
 
I just hope they don't try to fit so much story into the next one. This felt like it was written and shot as a 4-5 hour movie that got edited down to 2.5 hours. And instead of cutting down on the scope, they left all the important character and relationship development scenes on the cutting room floor. Easy example: every second they spent on the bar/selfie scene (trying not to give any spoilers) would have been better spent on the relationship between Aquaman and Dafoe's character (or the lady - meena or meera, not sure). The fact that I can't remember any of the characters names is a pretty big tell as far as character development goes. I went in with low expectations, the movie itself raised my expectations and then dashed them against the rocks of trying to squeeze too large of a story into a single 2.5 hour sitting. I'll probably give the sequel a shot, but if they don't try to limit the scope of the movie and actually tell a story I won't bother watching any others.
 
It is well deserved. Aquaman is, by far, the best DC movie created since Wonder Woman and it's definitely better than that.
 
Good on DC for having a successful film. But to be fair, is the film really competing against anything right now?
 
That's good that they brought the whole gang back for this record smashing second Aquaman!!
48239734_10218598420850508_3709725611908923392_n.jpg
 
I saw it at a giant IMAX. I really don't get the positive reviews, it was way too silly in not the good way, and the "jokes" fell flat - noone was laughing at anything. I enjoyed Momoa as Kal Drogo but here with more lines it is painfully obvious he can't act. Unfortunately my Imax was only showing in 3D, which was a very mediocre post conversion, but at least most of the film was in full 1.43:1 Imax aspect ratio (only available in select 1570/DL theaters - it is in IMAX Digital 1.9:1 in others).
 
A movie containing a buff dude flashing his package and a hot chick in spandex showing a lot of cleavage interspersed with 'splosions and punch ups makes money, weird that basically everything about that movie is anti PC yet made a bucket of cash. Almost like the majority actually want this and it's just the vocal minority think that the next James Bond should be trans. Coincidence, I'm sure
 
Jason Momoa sucks at acting.....

But that's pretty impressive that a B movie made 1Billion dollars.
 
masquap said:
A movie containing a buff dude flashing his package and a hot chick in spandex showing a lot of cleavage interspersed with 'splosions and punch ups makes money, weird that basically everything about that movie is anti PC yet made a bucket of cash. Almost like the majority actually want this and it's just the vocal minority think that the next James Bond should be trans. Coincidence, I'm sure
Click to expand...

So what you're saying that we should all go see it five times each just to really drive home the message to Hollywood?
 
Ironically my local news channel did a box office review this morning with a "What's hot and what's not."
Aquaman was the only one on the "not" list.
 
Saw it today. I didn't love it. I didn't hate it. It's already way beyond Ben Afleck Batman movies with just that measure.

I liked that Aquaman was a physical guy. He'd be a stooge any other way.

The story? 4/10. At best.

Bring on Suicide Squad 2, plz.
 
vegeta535 said:
It is funny how Aquaman been the butt of all the DC universe joke and become the first successful movie.
Click to expand...

I'd say its the 3rd successful movie out of the DCEU. Wonder Woman was well received and did well for itself at he box office. Man of Steel, despite some mixed reactions (primarily about the last act), was a successful movie. Outside of the DCEU, there have been multiple successful DC movies. Heck, even the 1966 Adam West Batman movie was successful. Aquaman will be the first billion dollar title in the DCEU and the first DC movie since Dark Knight Rise to hit that number (third DC movie to hit that number overall).
 
I liked it.
It wasn't great by any means, but I found it to be fun
I'd give it maybe 2.5/5
Second best movie DC have put out.
WW first
SS, Superman, SvB and Justice League were all fairly shite...although I put JL third in my list
 
Haven't seen this movie yet but when it comes to the DC universe I did enjoy The Superman movie with Zod, The Dark Knight, and the Suicide Squad movie and I am looking forward to the second one.
 
I don't how the film industry stays alive. All we get now are superhero films which have been so played out now and "reboots" of older movies. When will we get something original? /beforecoffeeface
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this
Westwood Arrakis said:
I don't how the film industry stays alive. All we get now are superhero films which have been so played out now and "reboots" of older movies. When will we get something original? /beforecoffeeface
Click to expand...
When superhero films and re-treads stop earning a billion dollars?
 
Westwood Arrakis said:
I don't how the film industry stays alive. All we get now are superhero films which have been so played out now and "reboots" of older movies. When will we get something original? /beforecoffeeface
Click to expand...
There are plenty of original movies out there, they just don't get the press that the superhero movies do. Hold the Dark and Annihilation were 2 really original and creative movies I watched recently.
 
I don’t understand how someone can say this move was good. It was abysmal. It was the worst movie I have seen in the movie theatres in over 10 years.

There is no natural character development. You have some key events that happen in the first 10 mins that are supposed to magically give you a connection with the characters.

Every scene the actors/actresses are forced into cheesy dialogue- nothing seems natural.

To recap - the movie was a 2 hour version of your everyday 1990s Power Rangers episode.
 
Westwood Arrakis said:
I don't how the film industry stays alive. All we get now are superhero films which have been so played out now and "reboots" of older movies. When will we get something original? /beforecoffeeface
Click to expand...

because new IP is risky, and it's difficult for studios to defer that risk. Tried and true formulas and already existing universes are much more reliable revenue streams.

It's just business.
 
vegeta535 said:
It is funny how Aquaman been the butt of all the DC universe joke and become the first successful movie.
Click to expand...

Uh what?

Wonder Woman did $821 million on a $120-150 million budget.
That's a success. They most certainly didn't spend $700 million on advertising...

Success isn't "Has to make a billion or it sucks".

The "Make a billion" is a recent development.

Modern "blockbusters" need to make something around cost+150% of their production cost (to account for advertising) before they're considered "successful".

Hell, look at the Deadpool films.
Deadpool 2 made 7x it's production cost.
Deadpool made 13.5x it's production cost.

Neither made a billion dollars. But both were unqualified and outrageous successes.
 
capt_cope said:
When superhero films and re-treads stop earning a billion dollars?
Click to expand...

Not gonna happen for a while.

Marvel and DC have about 50 years of really COMPLEX storytelling (of which they've only really gone after the easiest of the low hanging fruit thus far) across multiple heroic titles.

So there's metric assloads of movie material out there...

Hell, I'd sell the majority of my internal organs for a really GOOD She-Hulk adaptation...
 
FlawleZ said:
Ironically my local news channel did a box office review this morning with a "What's hot and what's not."
Aquaman was the only one on the "not" list.
Click to expand...

Tell that to all the mom's dragging their kids to the flick so they can ogle him.
 
Skyblue said:
The Dark Knight was fairly good IMO.
Click to expand...

TDK was one of the best of all time, but I don't think anyone is including any of Christopher Nolan's trilogy when discussing these new DC films. This is mostly about the "DC Extended Universe" films that are essentially DC's answer to Marvel's ultra-uber-mega-successful MCU. I actually enjoyed BvS but my first viewing was the director's cut so perhaps that helped.

Honestly, Batman's always been my favorite, but things become a lot less compelling when a bunch of your cast is basically invulnerable and/or gimmicky. Superman's fun an all but you can only work "I hope no one has pieces of my home planet" into the script so many times, and Wonder Woman appears to have no weakness at all plus her backstory is ridiculous. Then we get to Aquaman and the story again basically seems to be "magical underwater Superman" and it's like, uhhh okay, no thanks. Maybe it's different if you read the comics and you just want to see it come to life, but the MCU heroes seem a lot more balanced and fleshed out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top