Alright now. First of all, I will just wait for the inevitable trolls to say how this is just a Marvel fanboy bashing DC, blah blah blah, Nolan rules Whedon sucks, then the people who will argue the opposite, blah blah blah, etc.
....
Alright, now that the childish bickering is over with, let's begin.
Reason Number One: Less Theater Life than The Dark Knight
Before it starts, no, I am not talking about The Avengers, or even really Amazing Spider-Man. I'm talking actually about the infamous
2007-2008 Writers Guild Strike.
I know what you're thinking: What does that have to do with TDKR's theater life, you ask? Well, not anything to do with TDKR's theater life, but it had a hell of a lot to do with The Dark Knight's life, from what I can tell.
Basically, the Writers Guild of America, well, stopped writing. That affected TV shows and movies. Luckily, it didn't really affect any CBMs, as The Incredible Hulk had a script written by Zak Penn, later modified by Ed Norton, and Iron Man shot scenes without a script, which worked well for Robert Downey Jr, who is known for improvisation ("I'm a dude playin' a dude disguised as another dude!" from Tropic Thunder being a prominent example), and Goyer was working on the sequel to Batman Begins before the film even came out. However, this did leave a massive,
massive lack of competition, especially for The Dark Knight. Here's a list of the most prominent films released after The Dark Knight in 2008:
Mama Mia
Space Chimps
X-Files: I Want to Believe
Tropic Thunder
Star Wars: The Clone Wars (which was a three-episode TV show pilot released as a film)
Igor
Eagle Eye
High School Musical 3
Madagascar 2
Quantum of Solace
Twilight (the first Twilight movie is the lowest grossing of the franchise so far)
and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
So basically, it had zero significant competition outside of Quantum of Solace, which grossed 500 million, but The Dark Knight basically wiped the floor with every film that came out after it in 2008. It was in theaters until early March of 2009, bringing it to 8 months of theater life, almost twice as much as Batman Begins' 4-5 months.
Now, what does this have to do with The Dark Knight Rises, you ask? Well, if The Dark Knight Rises doesn't have the theater life that The Dark Knight does, it's very unlikely to beat it, even if it were the just as good as it, due to the fact that this year, the major films to premiere after TDKR's release are a lot more of a threat than in 2008:
The Expendables, which is sure to be in some form at least a roadblock slowing it down, a far more lively Twilight franchise coming to a conclusion, and the biggest threat from 2008, James Bond, coming back with the same fire they had for Casino Royale to win the fans over, which they seemed to lack with Quantum of Solace. Not to mention the Hobbit, a prequel to one of the highest-rated, highest grossing film trilogies of all time.
Now, I know what some of you will say: "Naturally, it'll have made a billion before those films come out, like how Harry Potter made a billion in a little over two weeks!" First off: If that's the case, how come it took The Dark Knight until February of 2009, seven months after it's release, to manage to scrape together 1 billion?
Which brings me to:
Reason Number Two: No 3D Release
*Waits for inevitable '3D means nothing comments'*
As you can tell by now, films reaching 1 billion are becoming more and more common, with 3 films joining the ranks in 2011 alone. Where The Dark Knight was once one of a few, it is now among several films, such as Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Pirates of the Caribbean 4, Toy Story 3, and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. One might be led to believe that this would
improve The Dark Knight Rises' chances of outdoing it's predecessor, after so many other films have done it. However, there is something that all the additions to the coveted Billion-Dollar Club have that The Dark Knight, and it's sequel, do not:
A 3D release.
While I am of the opinion that 3D is, in fact, an excuse for higher ticket prices inspired by Avatar's box office slaughtering of everything that dared to approach it, I can't deny that there has been a significant increase in film gross since it's implementation, as seen by the dramatic increase of films to reach a billion dollars. 6 of the 10 films to have reached this landmark had a 3D release. Even Titanic is getting a 3D release later this year. To say 3D has had no impact on box office gross is completely untrue. Whether or not 3D is useful as something to enhance the experience, that's a completely different argument. The point is, though, that the Dark Knight is the only major superhero film next year to not have a 3D release, and in a market where people are, for whatever reason, willing to pay more for tickets for 3D, that puts it at a disadvantage.
Reason Number Three: A Lack of Someone to Hold Up On A Pedestal
Let's face it, a big reason The Dark Knight was so good was Heath Ledger. His acting was great, the way his character was written was great, and pretty much everything aesthetically was great. In fact, when you think about it, a lot of The Dark Knight's marketing, hype, and success revolves around him.
The immense, immersive viral campaign was based around him.
The posters were almost all Joker-based.
He was the actor the critics were raving about.
His performance was talked about even before the film was being screened to critics as stunning, even making Michael Caine forget his lines in one of the first takes of the penthouse party scene because of said performance.
His untimely and unfortunate death, while tragic, certainly brought even more attention to him.
He was the one who was not only nominated, but won an Oscar for his performance.
Meanwhile, The Dark Knight Rises has Tom Hardy, a very small viral campaign, and numerous fans and critics alike having trouble understanding what Bane is saying in what is supposed to be finished footage. Anne Hathaway is, well...Anne Hathaway. She's well known, but no superstar by any means, and she's the better known of the two!
What's that, you say? What about Joseph Gordon Levitt or Miranda Tate? Well, there hasn't been really any buzz about either of their characters, except the seemingly endless cycle of rumors of John Blake being Black Mask/Azrael/Robin/Red Robin/Nightwing/Red Hood/Ras Al Ghul/Terry McGinnis/Deadshot/Joker and as for Tate, that she is Talia. Nothing like the buzz Ledger had been building up.
What about the other actors, you say? While Bale, Caine, and Oldman are fantastic actors, there isn't any one of them that compares to the amount of attention Ledger gets. The Academy seems to
ing hate Oldman, though, but still, none of the buzz for any actor in TDKR has gotten the amount of buzz or praise than Ledger did, even long before the film came out.
I mean, compare the box office Batman Begins to The Dark Knight. Some people claim that Batman and Robin caused the film to not do as well at the Box Office, but it had been almost 10 years since the release of Batman and Robin to the release of Batman Begins. I highly doubt people thought the two were related more than being a movie about Batman. I highly doubt the Katie Holmes/Maggie Gyllenhaal switch was a particular draw. Aaron Eckhart wasn't the big draw by many indications. Ledger was the one people were buzzing about.
Reason Number Four: Finale Appeal? Not as Much As You'd Like To Think...
I know what all of you are going to say now. "What do you mean, no finale appeal? Harry Potter 8 made over a billion, and it was a big finale too!"
The thing is, unlike Harry Potter, Batman hasn't consistently flirted with the billion dollar mark as much as Batman ever has.
Look at that, five out of eight of the films made over 900 million.
Now, let's take a look at Batman.
Now, I know what you're saying: "Half of those films aren't adjusted for inflation! They aren't accurate!"
That is...completely true. It isn't a fair comparison, since, for example, Batman 89's 400 million is in 1989 dollars, not 2011 dollars.
But even if we adjusted for inflation, it STILL wouldn't amount to getting close to the Billion as nearly as much as Potter did.
And now comes the part where you say "Well, Harry Potter had twice as many films as Nolans Batman series, so it isn't fair."
Okay then, what about Lord of the Rings?
No, still more consistent. As are Transformers, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc.
Notice how those franchises had a consistent upward trend prior to making a Billion dollars.
Meanwhile, Batman's grosses are far more erratic by comparison. In fact, out of all of them, The Dark Knight's one billion seems more like an outlier, an odd one out of the bunch, rather than evidence of consistent success, which many of the other franchises made.
In Conlcusion:
The Dark Knight managed to scrape enough money to get to a billion dollars only after an extremely unusually long theater run, and it was a great film. Even if The Dark Knight Rises is just as excellent as The Dark Knight was, if it has a shorter theater time, which, as I pointed out above, it very likely will, it won't make it up to a billion. Not to say it won't make a lot of money, it sure as hell will make at least 650-700 million internationally. Without a 3D boost or a Ledgerlike performance, I just can't believe the idea of it getting to a billion. Adding to the fact that TDK was dragged to the 1 Billion in and of itself, it seems more and more like the feat The Dark Knight accomplished won't be replicated by The Dark Knight Rises.