MOS blue ray/dvd sales.

[DochaDocha]

This is why sequels tend to make more money than the first. The people who didn't cough up the money in theatres to see it will see it on DVD/Blue-ray/Netflix/pirate it, like it, and go see the sequel in theatres.

Which is also why so many sequels get made. People tend to flock to familiar things. I think there's also a bandwagon effect. So, a lot of people see [Blank] 2 because they saw the first one, and then a lot of people who didn't see [Blank] 2 see that a lot of other people are going to see it, and just watch because everyone else saw it or is talking about it.

[Don C]

I wonder why IM3 did so crappy with these sales. It had at least a month and a half jump on MOS as far as DVD/ blue ray sales. And it was the biggest cbm of the year by far but apparently no one wanted to own the thing lol

My guess? Iron Man 3 was a movie people saw in theaters. Man of Steel was a watch-it-at-home movie.

[Auguste Dupin]

My guess? Iron Man 3 was a movie people saw in theaters. Man of Steel was a watch-it-at-home movie.

Yeah, but usually people tend to buy on dvd the movies they saw in theaters.

[Francisco]

Yeah, but usually people tend to buy on dvd the movies they saw in theaters.

That's when they actually like them. IMO.

[inisideguy]

My guess? Iron Man 3 was a movie people saw in theaters. Man of Steel was a watch-it-at-home movie.

Err that would probably be a bad guess. Since the movies that do well in the theater do well on DVD/Blue ray. Well that is of course except for IM3.

[Flash Gordon]

I am a Super-Superman fan and I absolutely loved MOS

Same here.

[exile001]

I am a Super-Superman fan and I absolutely loved MOS

Same here.

And me.

[Lexrules]

It was good for a modern telling of the story. Is it great? not even close but it is not bad either. Only problem was as I have said time and again is the ending but overall it was well done for what it was aiming for.

[dupersuper]

I had several issues with it, but I am most definitely a super Superman fan.

[AJBopp]

I find the disc sales of MoS vs. IM3 to be a bit intriguing. Intuitively, I just figure the ones that did better at the box office will do better in the home sales. Nope. I'd like to know the rationale. If I had to guess, it's that Iron Man was a bigger brand name at the moment, so people went to see it at the theatre regardless, but didn't need a second home viewing. Perhaps this is also a case that IM3 sales were lower than expected.

My guess is that Iron Man 3, for a long time, was not available on Blu-ray for less than $30, and even now isn't listed below $25 on Amazon that I can find. Man of Steel is currently sitting at $12.50 or so.

I know that Iron Man's price was too prohibitive for me to consider purchasing it. Still is, though I would love to have a copy.

[AJBopp]

Only people who hate MOS is the critics and Super-Superman fans.

I am neither a critic nor a super-Superman fan, and I hate MOS.

[Blacksun]

I don't hate MOS, it's a great science fiction movie, but a bad superman movie.

[Auguste Dupin]

I don't hate MOS, it's a great science fiction movie, but a bad superman movie.

I think I will never understand the "great X flick, but bad Y flick".
It's a good movie or it's not. In the end, it's really all that matters.

[DochaDocha]

I think I will never understand the "great X flick, but bad Y flick".
It's a good movie or it's not. In the end, it's really all that matters.

For me, it means that there is a set of characteristics that are necessary for a "good" movie, but for particular licenses, you have to pull from a subset of those set of characteristics, and if you pull from the bigger set but not the subset, you get a "good" movie that isn't particularly good for that license or characters.

For many fans, that means you can make a "good" movie in which the hero can kill the villain, but a "good Superman" movie can't have that.

[Auguste Dupin]

For me, it means that there is a set of characteristics that are necessary for a "good" movie, but for particular licenses, you have to pull from a subset of those set of characteristics, and if you pull from the bigger set but not the subset, you get a "good" movie that isn't particularly good for that license or characters.

For many fans, that means you can make a "good" movie in which the hero can kill the villain, but a "good Superman" movie can't have that.

Yeah, I get the point, but that's really splitting hairs.
At the end of the day, there's only one question left:
did you enjoy the movie?
I don't know, maybe it's because I consider movies as Elseworlds in the end, but everytime hear someone say "ho, it was a good movie, but Superman/Batman/Green Lantern/ Robin Hood didn't behave the way I expect so it's a bad "insert hero's name" movie", part of me always want to tell them to get lost and let the adults do the talking.