'The Amazing Spider-Man' Outlook: By The Numbers....by: Posted:
What firepower could propel Tuesday's opening "The Amazing Spider-Man" into the same stratosphere already breached by Marvel's "The Avengers" and anticipating the entry of Warner Bros.' "The Dark Knight Rises?"
E! Online has been so thorough as to crunch the numbers. The answer to that query? Let's start the bidding at equivalent to "howitzer."
Any reboot's success makes for a dicey proposition. That goes doubly so when it comes to somewhat of a damaged-goods intellectual property as "Spider-Man." In 2007, "Spider-Man 3" certainly made a metric ton of money, but it burned considerable capital with fans and critics with a goofy song-and-dance story that was somehow a more ridiculous Spider-Man musical than the creature that ate millions on Broadway.
Early word is that the film stays pretty true to the beloved characters, but takes the franchise in a more story- and character-driven direction. Major shifts like that can be risky, but in this case, it could be argued it's rarely been more needed. It's a matter of anything being better than what Sam Raimi cranked out last time.
But financially, what will it take to keep "The Amazing Spider-Man" from becoming the summer's third-banana superhero adventure? According to numbers running it up against some other notable comic-based feature openings...
Suppose it has a six-day opening that stacks up against "Superman Returns," another Fourth of July weekend reset of a wayward franchise. The two even have very similar Rotten Tomatoes ratings - 76-percent for "Superman Returns" against 78-percent for Spidey. That might be among the "worse-case" scenarios: "Superman Returns" scored a meager $84.6 million in its first five days.
Now, let's say we enter "Batman Begins" territory. Believe it or not, for as venerated as director Christopher Nolan's Batman re-imagining has been, it actually performed worse than "Superman Returns" in its opening weekend: $72.9 million in its first five days. Still, if "The Amazing Spider-Man" ends up as well-regarded by fans and critics alike, perhaps there's a web-slinger equal to "The Dark Knight" in Sony's future.
The best-case scenario? The realm of "Spider-Man 2." The 2004 Raimi sequel featuring Spider-Man versus Doctor Octopus - regarded by many as one of the best-made superhero sequels yet produced. Also opening Fourth of July weekend, it was likewise a financial shot out of the park: $152.4 million Thursday through Sunday. Alas, as E! points outs, "reboots are not sequels." This one has skepticism attached after Sony and Raimi burned fans with "Spider-Man 3." On the upside, this one has the advantage of premium IMAX 3-D sales padding the gross. Currently, Sony is hoping that it takes in $110-120 million, putting it on a clip with Paramount's first "Iron Man" movie.
Of course, that wouldn't be so bad for the Andrew Garfield-Emma Stone feature. "Iron Man" didn't reset a franchise onto more solid ground. ON the contrary, it restored faith in Marvel as a brand, successfully gave Marvel Studios a flying start with its very first brand feature based on one of its own properties, and was the first step in building toward - well, glory be - "The Avengers."