I don't think my porno example is terrible. How bout a romantic comedy that has numerous chase scenes and fight scenes? Those are action scenes but but nobody would call a romantic comedy an action movie. Romantic comedies are their own genre. Horror movies, although many have action sequences, are their own genre. Super hero movies are also their own genre. And yes, pornos are their own genre as well.

The difference between The Matrix and Spiderman is that Neo is not a super hero and Spiderman is.

The difference is that the other genre's you listed differ in actual content; not so much between a super hero movie and a typical action movie. Comedies have humor in them, Romantic movies are love stories, Horror movies scare you, Super Hero movies... have action. Either way, no point arguing if super hero movies are a genre unto themselves, it doesn't change my assertion that I don't believe audiences will tire of them soon, given that they're comprised of the same stuff that any big budget action movie has that has become a staple of the summer movie season.

There's tons of characters still left over to mine, and you'll probably see Batman, Superman, Spiderman, X-Men for years to come.

You're right. This argument is pretty silly since I certainly agree with you that super hero movies have action in them and are essentially action movies. I guess my last point is that I think we've gotten to the point where super hero movies (Spiderman, Superman, Thor, Green Latern, etc, etc, etc) could have their own section at Best Buy along with Drama, Horror, Comedy, etc simply because there are so many of them. And finally I'll just say that if your buddy is completely unaware of what the Die Hard movies are if if Die Hard 5 was coming out next summer and he asked you what Die Hard is, most likely you'd say it's a new action movie coming out next summer. If the same buddy, for the sake of my argument, knows what super heroes are but for whatever reason is unaware of who or what Spiderman is and the next Spiderman movie was coming out next summer and he asked you what it was, I have to believe you'd simply tell him it's a new super hero movie that's coming out.

1. Transformers: Dark of the Moon - $315 mil
2. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides - $310 mil
3 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt. 2 - $295 mil
4 Captain America - $280 mil
5. Cars 2 - $270 mil
6. Super 8 - $265
7. Green Lantern - $250 mil
8. Kung Fu Panda 2 - $220 mil
9. The Hangover 2 - $215 mil
10. X-Men: First Class - $205 mil
11. Thor - $200 mil
12. Cowboys and Aliens - $170 mil
13. Rise of the Apes - $160 mil
14. The Smurfs - $145 mil
15. Zookeeper - $125 mil
16. Crazy, Stupid, Love - $120 mil

Blind guesses really, don't even know what the last 2 are.

So True Lies is not a romantic comedy? Man I've learned a lot.

Never tried this before, but I can't sleep tonight so here's my guess at the top 10 when the summer's over and the tally's done.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon ($400-425 million)
The last one made a fortune and even fans admitted it sucked (unless speaking to non-fans). If this one is, in fact, an improvement, word of mouth, 3D prices, etc. will drive this to the top.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides ($380-400 million)
The issue isn't whether audiences have tired of Jack Sparrow; it's whether young women will show up to see a movie without Orlando Bloom & Keira Knightley. All I've heard personally from the women I know is that they think it's "stupid" to make another movie without them.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part II ($350-380 million)
Fans whose interest may have ebbed and flowed over the last decade will make a point of catching this last release.

Cars 2 ($300-350 million)
I consider Cars one of the weakest films in the Pixar canon, but Mom and Dad will want to take Little Johnny to something this summer that won't embarrass them. Figure is based on expecting the film to not perform as well as Toy Story 3's $414 million.

Thor ($280-300 million)
Fans will hope this is as rewarding as was Iron Man in 2008, and it has the benefit of being the first released superhero movie of the summer season. Between political issues and disastrous weather, I think people are champing at the bit for some escapism and just waiting for something like Thor to take their minds off things.

Captain America: The First Avenger ($280-300 million)
Stephen Colbert will promote the hell out of this, spurring his audience to go see it. Its biggest problem is being the fourth superhero movie of the summer (and third Marvel movie). It may become the victim of Superhero Fatigue.

Super 8 ($280-300 million)
By 10 June, audiences will be eager for something that feels original.

Green Lantern ($250-280 million)
Ryan Reynolds is likable enough that the women who are mad about Bloom and Knightley not being in Pirates will take a chance on this. Martin Campbell directed it, and his work on Bond and Zorro was solid. I think this one will surprise people who expect it to suck. Would do better if not for X-Men opening two weeks earlier.

The Hangover, Part II ($250-280 million)
The first movie guarantees a strong opening, and let's face it: there aren't many summer comedies to compete for its adult audience.

Kung Fu Panda 2 ($200-225 million)
I suspect families who feel their kids are too grown for Cars 2 will also feel their kids are grown enough for either Green Lantern (which opens the week before) or Transformers (which opens the next week).

Here's the problem, long-term: studios are run by alarmists. When Batman & Robin tanked (despite making money), Warner Bros. were convinced that no one ever wanted to see another Batman movie for the rest of time...or at least, until 2005. There are an awful lot of these movies this summer and if more than one of them under-performs you may see some studios scale back on production fearing the market is saturated. So even though there's a world of difference between The Flash and She-Hulk, and both are deserving of movie adaptations, they could become victims if other superhero-based movies don't make enough money.

Because there's a ton of merchandise to sell, they'll still continue to make those movies for a while, but they'll begin to spend considerably less money to make them. It's the effects budget that is most important with most of these movies; the reason there are so few superhero movies worth seeing from before the last 15 years is that Hollywood just wasn't up to the task of making such a movie actually look good. Then, if those cheaper-made movies don't perform well, all bets are off concerning other properties being developed.

Eventually, someone will take another chance and have another hit, but there may be some dry spells along the way.

Think Captain America just got a big boost?

not unless he fights bin laden in the movie.

Realistically, I think Cap not opening until 22 July means it's not likely to enjoy a "big boost." The comic geeks were going to see it anyway, and some people were going just because it's a superhero movie, but I think that this widespread enthusiasm will soften any cynicism toward Cap. I would think someone at Marvel/Paramount is really wishing that it was switched with Thor on the release schedule, though.

Yeah...I dunno if it would some massive impact akin to TDK. I'd doubt that.

Yeah, I mean, the last time we killed bin Laden, The Dark Knight really reaped the benefits. WTF are you talking about?

I missed some words in my post, I never proofread...fucking *sigh* I'm talking about sales. Something to motivate the sales. TDK, as entertaining and blah blah it was, got a shit ton of sales which I think most of us can be some attributed to Ledger's death garnering heavy interest. I don't think OBL's death would motivate (maybe a little) Cap that much in comparison to Ledger's death in motivating the sales to TDK. Considering the factors for the motivation are so different. One is related to the film, which garner's public interest. The other isn't.

In that case, I agree. There's no proper analog between Ledger/The Dark Knight and bin Laden/Captain America.

Thor is expected to make at least $30 mil this weekend, which would put its US total around $115 million. Next weekend is when Pirates 4 arrives, which will steal alot of business, but I guessed Thor to make $150 mil. I'd say it has a good shot of reaching that. Its worldwide numbers have already passed The Incredible Hulk.

Boxoffice.com is estimating only a $30.5 million opening for Super 8. I assumed that was a very low guess, but I've seen similar numbers on other box office sites. I'm hoping it can at least pull in $50+ or more. I know it'll probably have no chance of being the Summer's #1 flick, so I'm probably going to be way off on my guess. Hopefully word of mouth will carry it past $200 mil.

Current Standings (domestic), I'll consider anything released in April and beyond to be a Summer movie just to include Fast Five.

1. Fast Five $203m
2. Pirates 4 $196m
3. The Hangover Part II $195.2m
4. Thor $170.7m
5. Rio $137m
6. Bridesmaids $112m
7. Hop $108m
8. Kung Fu Panda 2 $107.5m
9. X-men First Class $70m
10. Water for Elephants $56m
* Source Code $54m

Pirates 4 will pass Fast Five in the next week, as will The Hangover Part II. Thor is looking to make around $2.5 - $3m this weekend and should hit maybe $177.5m by the time it closes.

Worldwide:
1. Pirates 4 $810.9m
2. Fast Five $574.2m
3. Rio $461.2m
4. Thor $428.7m
5. The Hangover Part II $346.7m
6. Kung Fu Panda II $253.1m
7. Hop $173.9m
8. X-men: First Class $144.5m
9. Bridesmaids $112.2m
10. Source Code $111.8m
* Water for Elephants $109.4m

To borrow from our last president, I may have misoverestimated some performances. Still a little early for some, though.

I went out on a gigantic limb and predicted $350 million for "Super 8". Mainly because I desperately wanted something that wasn't part of an established franchise to be the big winner this Summer.

Given the fact that the industry is expecting only $30 million this weekend, "Super 8" will need Titanic size word of mouth to even reach $200 mil. Transformers 3 will probably be the champ again. It seems Pirates 4 is the one most people overestimated, at least in the US.

To break $200m, Super 8 would have to pull Wedding Crashers style numbers by dropping around 24% each weekend on average. That is with a $35m opening.

And it only has Green Lantern, Transformers, Captain America, and Harry Potter as similar competition over the next few weeks.

I think you might still get your wish, but I'm hedging my bet that it'll be Cowboys & Aliens rather than Super 8.

I went with Transformers on the theory that if the second one dominated while sucking, pretty much any attempt to make a better film should translate into a better word of mouth and a box office take at least as good as the last one.

As for Pirates, I'm not really sure what's happened. I saw it and actually liked it--unlike the last two in the series. Most of the reviews I've read have really amounted to hating the series at this point, and franchises in general, rather than commenting on any specific shortcomings of this film. It seems its failure for a lot of people was really just existing in the first place. I found it coherent and much more light-hearted than the previous sequels. It was like getting to hang out with an old friend for the first time since his breakup with the ex you hated.

I have a feeling it's going to be one of those movies that TV will eventually vindicate. Four years from now there'll be a lot of people channel surfing and settle on it, and then start admitting, "You know, this one's actually better than I thought it was." Of course, that doesn't do anything for the movie now!

Doesn't this post kind of prove the point I was trying to make about people on this forum only caring about domestic box office performance? Pirates 4 has brought in over $800 million worldwide and is currently the 28th ranked movie of all time worldwide and you're wondering what happened and seem to be implying that it's performance has been at least somewhat disappointing. I guess it's disappointing that the other 2 made close to and over $1 billion worldwide, but still $800 millioin is pretty damn good.

However, $196 million domestically isn't something to get TOO excited about especially since a $250 million domestic movie isn't that uncommon since there have been over 60 of them and the other 3 all did over $300 million.

The "non US" numbers for Pirates 4 is already higher than the first one and will most likely end up very close to or even surpass Pirates 2 and 3. Really the only difference in numbers between this movie and the others is that its domestic performance has so far been $100-200 million less than the previous 3. It'll probably end up making a total of close to $850 million worldwide which sure isn't bad considering it's the 4th of a series and is missing 2 of the major stars from the original trilogy.

To be honest, I wasn't thinking about its international take, nor was I conscious of your previous post about global performance. I was referring to the fact that it's been largely derided here in the U.S. (despite making what is by all accounts decent money) and, as you point out, hasn't quite hit $200 million yet here. The last I heard it had a very low rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and every review I've come across from pros to fans has basically been the same thing: "I hated this, it's awful, should never have been made, should be banned by the Geneva convention, etc." but nothing about what actually makes it so awful. It's more a general disdain for the very existence of the film. That's what I was addressing.

On the larger issue of whether the industry and/or we as fans ought to begin taking a more holistic view of a film's performance, I'm in complete agreement with you. I mean, it's not like Disney doesn't still make the hundreds of millions of dollars off the movie just because those tickets weren't sold in the U.S. I've never tried this box office prediction task before, but as I learn the ins and outs next year I'll try to think global when formulating my guesses.

Sorry. When you said you weren't sure what happened, I thought you were talking about the box office performance rather than the quality of the movie.