Why Man of Steel’s Box Office Was More Disappointing Than Superman’s (Despite Making More Money)

by

With James Gunn’s *Superman* hitting theaters this summer, many wondered how its box office performance would compare to Zack Snyder’s *Man of Steel*. Both films were initially intended as the first movies in a new, interconnected cinematic universe for Warner Bros., with hopes of launching a long-running series of successful films. However, the DC Extended Universe started by *Man of Steel* didn’t quite work out as planned, leading Warner Bros. to reset the entire on-screen DC story with Gunn’s new DC Universe. Because the previous DC films had been inconsistent and several hadn’t performed well financially, a lot of pressure was on *Superman* to succeed. Some worried that if the film flopped, Warner Bros. might face similar struggles to those experienced by 20th Century Fox.

Fortunately, the new *Superman* movie did better than expected at the box office, largely because people liked it and told their friends. It stayed popular in theaters for a while, though its run was shortened by the release of *Peacemaker* Season 2, and ultimately became the highest-grossing comic book film of 2025. However, some fans pointed out that *Man of Steel* actually earned more worldwide—$670.1 million compared to *Superman*’s $615.9 million. Interestingly, despite earning less, *Man of Steel* might be considered the more underwhelming success overall.

Man of Steel Should Have Been a Bigger Box Office Hit

Look, $670.1 million at the box office is a good number, but as a critic, I honestly think *Man of Steel* could have been a *much* bigger hit. It came out in June 2013, right when superhero movies were really taking off and dominating the decade. The summer before had seen both *The Avengers* and *The Dark Knight Rises* break the billion-dollar mark, proving just how hungry audiences were for comic book adaptations. It wasn’t realistic to expect a brand new series to immediately reach that level, but Warner Bros. definitely had high expectations for *Man of Steel*. They were hoping for a blockbuster, and they had a smart strategy: the film brought Superman back to the big screen after a long absence, and the marketing leaned *heavily* on Christopher Nolan’s involvement as a producer – a clear attempt to link it to the prestige and success of his *Dark Knight* trilogy.

Despite a strong opening weekend earning $116.6 million domestically, *Man of Steel* quickly lost momentum. Negative reviews and word-of-mouth led to a significant drop in ticket sales – a 64.6% decrease – causing the film to fall from first to third place. While the initial success showed audience excitement for a reimagined Superman, the mixed reactions ultimately hurt its potential. Had the film been better received by critics and audiences, it could have potentially earned $700 or even $800 million, which would have been a fantastic start for a new franchise. During the 2010s, films like *Guardians of the Galaxy* and *Aquaman* proved that even lesser-known characters could become huge box office successes. A well-received Superman movie could have been one of the decade’s biggest hits.

Movie studio bosses likely felt *Man of Steel* didn’t quite reach its full potential. Almost immediately after its release, they announced *Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice* and began rapidly developing a shared universe of characters. The mixed reactions to *Man of Steel* may have pushed them to quickly introduce major team-ups. Instead of making a second, solo Superman movie with Henry Cavill, Warner Bros. tried to quickly match the success of Marvel by adding Batman, Wonder Woman, and other heroes to create buzz. This made the DC Extended Universe feel rushed, and important characters didn’t have enough space to develop naturally.

The DC Extended Universe (DCEU) didn’t become as popular as Warner Bros. wanted, and the initial reaction to *Man of Steel* likely contributed to that. While a strong opening weekend is important for big-budget movies, how well a film continues to earn money over time is just as crucial. *Iron Man* ultimately proved more successful than *Man of Steel*, even though it initially earned less, because positive reviews and word-of-mouth kept audiences coming back. This success gave Marvel the confidence to move forward with *The Avengers*. Warner Bros., however, felt pressured to quickly change direction and combine characters in an attempt to regain interest. If *Man of Steel* had performed more consistently like *Iron Man*, we might still be getting new DCEU movies.

Why Superman Is More Successful (Despite Grossing Less)

One major difference between the films *Superman* and *Man of Steel* is how well they were received by audiences. *Superman* earned a ‘Certified Fresh’ rating on Rotten Tomatoes, which helped it perform better than expected in theaters. It made $125 million domestically in its first three days and continued to draw audiences, dropping only 53.2% in its second weekend. It stayed in first place for two weeks before being overtaken by *The Fantastic Four: First Steps*. *Man of Steel*, on the other hand, was only number one for a single weekend before being surpassed by *Monsters University* and *World War Z*. While *Superman* may not have been hugely profitable from ticket sales alone, Warner Bros. was still pleased with how it did.

As a huge DC fan, I’m really encouraged by what James Gunn is building. The fact that he’s moving forward with *Man of Tomorrow* tells me the studio liked what they saw in the first *Superman* film. Even though he’s in charge of DC Studios with Peter Safran, he still has to answer to the folks at Warner Bros. Discovery, but so far, they seem happy to let him take his time with the universe. *Man of Tomorrow* sounds like it’s going to be epic, but in a way that feels like a natural progression from the first film – not the jarring shift we saw with *Batman v Superman*. It’s smart to build on the Superman/Lex Luthor rivalry, since audiences already connect with that dynamic. And honestly, the fact that we haven’t seen Batman or Wonder Woman yet suggests they’re not rushing into a massive crossover. If *Superman* hadn’t performed well, I’m sure Gunn would be under a lot more pressure to speed things up and deliver quick results.

It might seem strange to say that the new *Superman* movie did better even though it didn’t make as much money as *Man of Steel*, but you have to consider how different things are now. Back when the original *Superman* came out, people went to the movies a lot more! Now, with streaming being so popular – especially after the pandemic – a lot of us are happy to wait and watch at home. While there have been some big hits recently, overall, movie ticket sales haven’t fully recovered to where they used to be, so what counts as a success has changed. Plus, superhero movies aren’t the guaranteed blockbusters they once were – just look at how up and down Marvel’s year has been. That’s why I think it’s amazing that *Superman* still ended up as the highest-grossing comic book movie of 2025, and is currently the third highest-grossing movie of the year here in the US!

The real success of *Superman* isn’t about how much money it made, but how well it sets up the future of the DC Universe. Even though it earned less at the box office than *Man of Steel*, audiences responded positively to David Corenswet as Superman and are excited to see where his story goes, even though team-ups with other heroes are still a ways off. Overall, the DCU is starting strong (despite some mixed reactions to the *Peacemaker* finale), which builds anticipation for *Man of Tomorrow* and the upcoming films.

What do you think? Leave a comment below and join the conversation now in the ComicBook Forum!

https://comicbook.com/movies/feature/an-era-in-superhero-movies-is-quietly-ending-and-no-one-is-really-talking-about-it/embed/#

Read More

2025-10-17 22:46