"Avengers" Super Bowl ad

POSTED BY: whozit
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 20:00
VIEWED: 7759
PAGE 1 of 3

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

WHOZIT

Wednesday, February 1, 2012 11:20 PM

http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/super-bowl-sneak-peek-the-avengers

WHOZIT

Wednesday, February 1, 2012 11:42 PM

GO GIANTS!! Patriots suck..and are stupid..and ugly..and smell like

RIONAEIRE

Thursday, February 2, 2012 12:51 AM

Once I found out Thor is in the Avengers I got way more interested. :)

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

LWAVES

Thursday, February 2, 2012 10:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
Once I found out Thor is in the Avengers I got way more interested. :)

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

Do you mean Thor, or a certain Mr. Chris Hemsworth?

The footage is too short to really judge anything but most of the 7 comments under it seem to have written it off already. Stupid

.
Plus, to my knowledge, director's don't make the teasers and trailers - the studios do. In much the same way the record companies usually select the running order of an album and which singles are released.

It's Joss, so I'm there anyway plus I liked all the films that link into this one so it's a must-see film for me.

"The greatest invention ever is not the wheel. It's the second wheel." - Rich Hall

OPPYH

Thursday, February 2, 2012 5:26 PM

I heard some serious spoilers.
Not sure how accurate the rumor is(I thought this was leak proof!) but if it is indeed accurate the story is...WOW!

Lets just say if it turns out to be such, Joss will have single handedly made THE ULTIMATE MARVEL MOVIE.
I am now more excited than every other super hero movie I ever anticipated combined.

----------------------------------------------------------------

70's TV FOREVER

STORYMARK

Thursday, February 2, 2012 6:43 PM

Such as??

There have been a lot of BS "spoilers" via pure speculation, but little legit info has come out, just yet.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

OPPYH

Thursday, February 2, 2012 7:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Such as??

There have been a lot of BS "spoilers" via pure speculation, but little legit info has come out, just yet.

Probably is BS. Don't hold much stock in it, but it does sound pretty good.

WARNING POSSIBLE SPOILERS:

----------------------------------------------------------------

70's TV FOREVER

STORYMARK

Thursday, February 2, 2012 7:45 PM

Well, at the very least, both Marvel and Hugo Weaving have said the Red Skull will not be in the movie.

The stuff about Thanos is a possibility, and has been long rumored - but I doubt he'll be as big an aspect of the story as they say here - more likely just a cameo, setting him up as the villain for Avengers 2.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

OPPYH

Thursday, February 2, 2012 8:18 PM

The budget has me a little worried. $220 (according to IMDB) mil. Not that I don't think it won't make that much back, but at that price things could get a little iffy on the returns. I'm not sure of what Paramount expects, but if I rememmber correctly Superman Returns from WB was upward of $200 million, and it did turn a profit but WB was not happy with how it performed at the Box Office.

Story,
Do you any info on what studios expect from a big blockbuster title like the Avengers? If they want to double their money they might be in for a shocker.

----------------------------------------------------------------

70's TV FOREVER

STORYMARK

Thursday, February 2, 2012 8:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
The budget has me a little worried. $220 (according to IMDB) mil. Not that I don't think it won't make that much back, but at that price things could get a little iffy on the returns. I'm not sure of what Paramount expects, but if I rememmber correctly Superman Returns from WB was upward of $200 million, and it did turn a profit but WB was not happy with how it performed at the Box Office.

Story,
Do you any info on what studios expect from a big blockbuster title like the Avengers? If they want to double their money they might be in for a shocker.

----------------------------------------------------------------

70's TV FOREVER

General rule of thumb is that a film needs to make at least twice its budget to be profitable. But even that is iffy on projects like this. For instance, they'll likely spend a lot more on advertising for this than most films, but it'll make more in ancilliaries (toys and such) than most flicks.

I wouldn't worry too much about that budget. It isn't super-huge, but it's not realy small, either. $440 million as a break-even isn't that hard to reach. Captain America is the lowest-grossing Marvel movie to date, and it made $368 million worldwide. Iron Man, the highest so far, brought in $585 million - and that was with lower ticket prices, and no 3D bump. Id expect Avengers to do at least $500 million internationally.

In the case of Superman Returns, the budget actually included 10 years worth of failed attepts to make the movie (under Tim Burton, McG and Brett Ratner).

With Avengers, they shot most of it here in New Mexico, and the rest in Ohio. In NM there is (or was at the time) a 25% rebate on anything they spend in the state, and Im assuming Ohio has a simmilar program. So that there probably knocks off 20-30 million at the least.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE