>When you say that MoS underperformed, is that critical?
>Financial? Or both? Critical isn't too hard to understand
>(although I enjoyed the movie), but financially ... it's up to
>about 620 million worldwide. Still more than solid numbers.
>Was WB expecting Dark Knight or Avengers money straight out of
>the gate?

The critical disappointment is obvious, no need to waste time debating that.

Financially, hey spent more on MoS than either The Dark Knight or The Avengers (TDKR cost more, but was obviously a more sure thing). Fourth most expensive superhero movie ever, after TDKR, Spider-Man 3, and The Amazing Spider-Man, and it'll finish below all of those in worldwide gross, not to mention plenty of lower-budgeted flicks like Avengers, The Dark Knight, the other Spider-Man films, and Iron Man 3.

Considering it had the Nolan name and was considered "the next big thing" for the DC Universe, this isn't a financial disappointment in terms of profitability, but it is a financial disappointment in terms of expectations. I'd be stunned if they expected any less than 325-350 domestic, 750-800 worldwide.

To give you a comparison, adjusted for inflation, Superman Returns had a 100 million dollar opening weekend... and if you add the 15% that the industry generally accepts is the bump for IMAX/3D, its opening weekend domestically is very similar to what Man of Steel did. And Superman Returns was considered a financial disappointment in terms of expectations.

I'm sure someone could counter this point by saying expectations don't matter, only the bottom line... but there's no question DC feels the heat. With Sony ramping up the Sinister Six in the next Spidey flick, Avengers 2 in 2015, and Fox trying to bring the X-Men world to a bigger level next year, WB can't afford for their DC movies to keep coming in below expectations. Green Lantern tanked, Man of Steel came in at the most grounded of financial expectations at best. A Justice League movie still seems a long way away at this point.