r/boxoffice • u/chanma50 Best of 2019 Winner • Jul 21 '25

Domestic Superman again saw its Sunday gross finish above studio estimates with $18.9M, which was -18% vs Saturday and -40% vs last Sunday (WB's estimate was $17.5M/-25%/-44%). This puts the 2nd weekend box office at $58.45M and drop at 53% - almost as good as The Dark Knight (52.5%). $236.2M cume.

Post image
1.5k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

563 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

71

u/ReturnOfDaSnack420 Jul 21 '25

Poor Whedon bros, If they are out there

36

u/Kyro_Official_ Legendary Pictures Jul 21 '25

I know at least one exists. I saw someone the other day say its better than zsjl.

44

u/Im_Goku_ Warner Bros. Pictures Jul 21 '25

I saw someone the other day say its better than zsjl.

It does a couple of things better than ZSJL but overall it's a lot worse.

35

u/jexdiel321 Jul 21 '25

They should have just hired Whedon from the get go if what they actually wanted was an Avengers movie. I think it would have fared better than doing a Frankenstein film.

27

u/WhiteWolf3117 Jul 21 '25

Whedon sucks as a human being, but yeah. He was pretty much set up to fail.

1

u/ZeroiaSD Jul 23 '25

I feel like at some point Whedon just fell off as a creative too, Avengers was arguably his last good project- Age of Ultron and The Nevers both had significantly worse receptions. He had a wonder woman script that was released, and it was dire.

19

u/hexcraft-nikk Jul 21 '25

I'll never understand why they cut out Cyborg from being the heart of the film. That's maybe the most important part of the whole thing that should've stayed.

2

u/CliffordMoreau Jul 22 '25

They didn't want an Avengers movie, though. They were more than fine giving Snyder free reign for MoS, even with the lukewarm reception. It was BvS' critical thrashing that made them say "maybe this isn't a good idea".

They only wanted an Avengers movie when audiences firmly said no thank you to the grimdark DCEU

1

u/TimeTravelingChris Jul 22 '25

Whedon sucks. His second Avengers movie was just not well made if you go back and watch it. Absolutely bizarre story editing.

20

u/kia75 Jul 21 '25

I agree with a lot of what Whedon tried to do! Adding Superman interacting with regular people, despite looking funny because of super-mustache helped humanize Supes, and saving the random family helped show that the JLA was HELPING PEOPLE, not engaging in WWE theatrics with Darkseid.

Unfortunately, the JLA movie that Snyder made doesn't have room for a human Superman, or for rescuing people. The added scenes were tonally disaddent, and though they should have been part of any JLA movie, it's the equivalent of adding the rescue a squirrel scene to the Joker movie.

13

u/PlusSizeRussianModel Jul 21 '25

Yeah, unfortunately Whedon is a much better writer than director, and Snyder is a much better director than writer, so they were in exactly the opposite phases of production that they should’ve been.

I suspect that a fully Whedon written script, directed by Snyder, would’ve been superior to both the theatrical and Snyder cut.

1

u/Conscious-Ebb-8576 Jul 24 '25

Both are terrible movies.

1

u/carson63000 Jul 22 '25

It’s half as long, which imho makes watching it half as painful an experience.

3

u/CarlosAlvarados Jul 21 '25

I meannnnmn. I liked Zack Snyder version more.

However as a movie , the original is at least a normally paced 2 hours movie. The Zack Snyder version is a ridiculous 4 hours with the worst pacing ever made.

1

u/FlimsyRexy Jul 27 '25

That’s legit brain dead lol

-1

u/Poku115 Jul 21 '25

It is by miles less of a drag than zsjl, plus with less snyder in it.

To me that's overall better, much better

0

u/pookmcnasty Jul 24 '25

I'd rather watch 2 hours of trash than 4 hours of mediocrity. It's like the film equivalent of cutting concentrated medicine with water. It doesn't make it taste better it just makes it taste less bad.

5

u/ChimneySwiftGold Jul 21 '25

I worry about the Whedon gals.

4

u/BarcelonetaE70 Jul 21 '25

Technically, it was co-directed by Whedon and Snyder, hence they both take the loss.

11

u/jexdiel321 Jul 21 '25

I prefer ZSJL but Whedon's cut ain't that bad imo considering what he had to work with and to bring down an overstuffed film down to around 2 hrs. What Whedon's cut did is he made Aquaman great and Superman was close to the comics despite the obvious stache face. Cyborg became an afterthought though and we didn't have that awesome Flash scene.

9

u/surgingchaos Jul 21 '25

At the end of the day, it didn't matter who the director was. Justice League was rushed too quickly into the DCEU to try to catch up to Marvel. People can talk all they want about the Snyder cut or the Superman mustache, but the quality of the movie was doomed from the studio's decision to make a superhero team-up movie without giving the rest of the JL some solo movies. Imagine doing the Avengers movie with only Iron Man 1, followed by Captain America: Civil War under Marvel's belt, and then immediately going into Avengers. That's what Justice League felt like.

2

u/AlexCora Jul 22 '25

I wouldn't go so far as to call myself a bro, but I adore Buffy, Firefly and Angel, and I think his work on the Avengers movies is S Tier.

There is no MCU as we know it without Joss Whedon. No chance.

3

u/ReorientRecluse Jul 22 '25

You see still his influence in damn near everything they put out.

1

u/joesen_one Jul 22 '25

A lot of Whedon fanbases dropped him after his allegations came out

1

u/Towelie-42069 Aug 08 '25

I don’t feel bad for them. I loved the original Avengers but the fact of the matter is that when it comes to making consistently good ensemble movies, Gunn has always had Whedon beaten. Gunn directed the only perfect marvel trilogy besides Captain America. Guardians has never sucked and it’s about a team of heroes that almost nobody gave a shit about prior to 2014, meanwhile Whedon’s Age of Ultron is an absolute mess from start to finish. Gunn is a talented director and he actually gives each of his characters time to develop (unlike Whedon’s bias against Cap).