Somewhere in the deep dark attics of Time Warner, Superman has been waiting. He's been gathering star dust, or whatever it is that superheroes gather when they lie in attics so long. Up until last year, he was stored right next to Batman -- until he, you know, Begined with the $200 million, eighth-highest-grossing movie of 2005.
It was about time Superman answered the call and swooped down to save Time Warner from its no-big-movie-having self, says Rick Munarriz for the Motley Fool. The company has no top-10 movies this year, despite big hopes with action block-wanna-be-busters V for Vendetta, Firewall, and Poseidon.
That will certainly change with Superman Returns, says Munarriz, and he doesn't even much care if the movie doesn't make back its $260 million production budget. If people love it (and they will!), "it can turn the spigot for more cost-effective sequels in the coming years. This is about more than just one film or one Halloween season with a few more trick-or-treating Superman kiddies than in years past. It's about making a statement."
I, for one, hope Superman can save Time Warner -- if only for the fun I'll have writing headlines about it. [Photo opendoorexit]
Closing Bell: Economic Catapult for Thanksgiving & Black Friday (WMT, TGT, GRMN, GOOG, MSFT)
Deere up on Q4 earnings performance
Reid Hoffman: LinkedIn will go public (at some point)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-29-2006 @ 1:12AM
Frodo Baggins said...
riddle me this sarah
what do you get when you pay a bunch of unqualified chickie poos five dollars per post to blog on a subject they know nothing about?
the answer is of course, posts like this
catchy headline, but no, superman cannot save time warner if harry potter and my own dear friends in middle earth weren't able to budge the stock, rest assured the son of jorel will have no better luck
i've said it before and i'll keep saying it every time you post some inane blather like this (do enjoy that five spot though -- don't spend it all in one place) THERE IS ONE AND ONLY ONE ISSUE THAT WILL EVER MOVE TWX -- RESOLUTION OF THE AOL ISSUE
you could make the argument that time warner accidentally holds one of, if not the greatest internet property, should hold onto it, invest in it and never let her go there's a rational if unlikely scenario to be played out there
i prefer to argue that the best thing for time warner shareholders and the best thing for aol is an immediate parting of the ways (wonder twin powers, shape of the fastest unmerger in history)
but please don't waste our time with the superman tripe especially on the same day that tobias latches on to the real drama to watch this summer
6-29-2006 @ 10:55AM
ed tucker said...
saw superman last nite . actor from iowa pretty good. movie too long. computer graphics made superman look artificial several times in movie. i would give the movie a c rating. lex luther charactor best in movie but still give him b+ , the son of superman poorly cast, poor acting, poor personality. poor direction, grade of d-. lois lane over acted to the unbelievable. i would not see or rent this movie ever. only good thing the theater was cool and the popcorn was hot and buttery
6-30-2006 @ 11:12PM
boximus brown ("box" Brown) said...
Ok, well it is pretty obvious the author of this blog knows nothing about this subject and just wants to make a quick buck. Superman had cool effects, but overall it was nothing great. Spiderman and Batman were well ahead of this movie. Blogging crap for a quick buck is just useless.