It looks like James Gunn’s Superman is going to double to profit of Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel, according to reports, despite making less at the worldwide box office.
When Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel launched in 2013, it was billed as the bold new beginning of a cinematic universe that Warner Bros. hoped could rival Marvel’s Avengers empire. The movie grossed more than $670 million worldwide, an impressive figure that secured Snyder a multi-film deal and birthed what would eventually be known as the Snyderverse.
Henry Cavill as Superman in Man of Steel – HBO Max
Fast forward to 2025, and James Gunn’s Superman has proven to be a very different kind of beast. The numbers are in, and while Gunn’s Superman reboot didn’t eclipse Snyder’s Man of Steel at the global box office, it still stands as the more viable project—because of one critical metric: profit.
The Raw Numbers
Let’s break down the numbers to see how Superman was able to eclipse Man of Steel in terms of profit, according to a report out of Variety.
Worldwide Gross:
- Man of Steel: $670 million
- Superman: $614 million
Profitability:
- Man of Steel: $42.7 million
- Superman: $125 million
Rahcel Brosnahan as Lois Lane in Superman – YouTube, DC
So despite bringing in less overall revenue, Gunn’s Superman delivered nearly triple the profit of Snyder’s Man of Steel. This comes from a Variety report highlighting that Gunn’s film not only managed costs better but also performed stronger domestically, where studios retain a higher percentage of ticket sales.
Why Profit Beats Gross
The secret here is efficiency. Snyder’s film carried a production cost estimated at $258 million, with tens of millions more in residuals and participations. It played heavily overseas, including in China and Russia—markets where Hollywood sees a fraction of box office returns.
Lex Luthor in the trailer for James Gunn’s Superman – YouTube, DC
Gunn’s Superman, by contrast, leaned on North American audiences. The film launched with a $122 million domestic opening, outpacing Man of Steel’s $116.6 million debut, and ultimately became the highest-grossing solo Superman movie ever in the United States. While the worldwide tally came in lower, Warner Bros. saw far healthier margins.
Snyderverse Fans Won’t Like This…
Snyder loyalists—often referred to as “Snyder-Bros”—have long argued that Man of Steel laid the groundwork for DC’s most “ambitious” cinematic vision. But when executives crunch the numbers, the reality is unavoidable: James Gunn’s Superman is simply the more profitable venture. The Snyderverse ultimately failed, which is how we got to Gunn’s DCU in the first place.
HOLLYWOOD, CALIFORNIA – DECEMBER 13: (EDITOR’S NOTE: Image has been digitally enhanced.) Zack Snyder attends the Netflix Premiere of Zack Snyder’s REBEL MOON – Part One: A Child of Fire at TCL Chinese Theatre on December 13, 2023 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Emilio Madrid/Getty Images for Netflix)
That doesn’t erase Snyder’s global reach, nor does it diminish the cultural moment Man of Steel represented in 2013. But for a studio trying to rebuild trust with audiences and shareholders, Gunn’s Superman offers something Snyder’s never did: a project that actually delivers a solid return.
The Bigger Picture
This profit margin makes Gunn’s Superman not just a win, but a strategic win over Man of Steel. Warner Bros. Discovery has been under enormous pressure to stabilize its DC brand after years of uneven results. By proving that the world’s most iconic superhero can be reintroduced profitably—even without hitting billion-dollar heights—Gunn has carved out a foundation that could sustain future installments.
James Gunn sits for an interview – YouTube, GQ
Meanwhile, Snyder’s film, for all its spectacle, remains an expensive reminder of Warner’s old playbook: go big, spend bigger, and hope it all pays off.
Final Thoughts
The comparison is going to sting for diehard Snyder fans. Yes, Man of Steel still holds the higher gross, But Gunn’s Superman is the project studio execs will point to as the smarter, safer, and more sustainable path forward. Because at the end of the day how much money you make on a project is irrelevant. It’s about how much money you make vs. the cost of making it.
That’s why a movie with a $800 break even point that makes $1 billion is less successful as a movie with a $150 break even point that makes $500 million.
Superman in the trailer for James Gunn’s Superman – YouTube, DC
And if nearly tripling Snyder’s profits wasn’t enough to ignite debate, just wait until the social media arguments start trying to spin this one. But the accountants have already decided who won.
How do you feel about Superman nearly tripling the profit generated by Man of Steel? Sound off in the comments and let us know!
Ah, creative accounting 101. Throw all these massage able numbers aside. Did it even sniff a billion? That’s been proven as the low floor for a successful tent pole. Superman just ain’t that super, no matter how you slice it. I’m sure jim gunn has a fresh new haircut and some hip warby parkers, though.
Aquaman made it to a billion. The Joker made it to a billion. The Dark Knight made it to a billion. Even a Marvel B-list character like Black Panther made it to a billion. And Deadpool & Wolverine did it just last year.
So it doesn’t speak well for DC that one of their flagship characters can’t hit that number, if it was really as good as Gunn’s fans claim it is.
Precisely.
Did you account for INFLATION!!!!!!
That 670 Million for Man Of Steel is worth around 920 Million today. So it is WAY more profitable than this recent trash.
Seriously people, who would believe a Modern Film can make the same as even an ok one from back in the early 2010s…….
The fact that ticket prices are now DOUBLE what they were when Man of Steel was in theaters should always be taken into account when making these comparisons.
I don’t buy a word of this …if Superman was so profitable, it wouldn’t on streaming right now and already at a discounted price.
End of story
The fact it hit streaming after only a month tells Me All I need to know, movies making insane profits stay in theaters as long as possible…it’s clear Superman 2025 needing to be profitable is a group effort….I don’t buy a word of this.
Corporations can’t stop lying with stats. (Inflation being ignored is one egregious fiddle).
This piece by Marvin Montanaro is just one big lie and I’m very disappointed that ThatParkPlace has allowed these lies to be published.
The comparison is NOT factoring inflation into the mix. The only TRUE way to compare films that are multiple years apart is by ticket count with the same dollar amount. You get a count of day time non-iMax showings, the number of day time iMax showings, and the same for showing at night time showings and assign each movie the same value for each of these 4 categories of tickets. Whatever the avg ticket price was for the later made of the 2 films being compared is the best value to use for each since it then takes into account inflation. That’s how you find out which of the TRULY sold more tickets. For the budget you adjust the older films budget for inflation and then subtract that from ticket profits to get a TRUE value to compare with.
So lets look at the 2 films and see how wrong Marvin Montanaro is with his article.
NOTE:
All values are in millions unless specified otherwise.
Domestic box office takes is typically a 50/50 split meaning the studios profit from domestic sales is 50%
International Box office varies based on locale so an average of 30% is typically used to determine International sales profits.
MOS DOMESTIC take = 291. This means the profit is around 146
MOS International take = 377. This means the profit is around 113
Estimated production budget = 225
SUPERMAN DOMESTIC take = 354. This means the profit is around 172
SUPERMAN International take = 261. This means the profit is around 78
Estimated production budget = 225
The above are all UNADJUSTED (for inflation) numbers
MOS profit (w/o accounting for marketing) = 34
SUPERMAN profit (w/o accounting for marketing) = 25
W/O even taking into account inflation, the 2013 MOS movie has so far outperformed the 2025 SUPERMAN film. Since the SUPERMAN film has not yet fully ended it’s run it technically could catch up but it’s unlikely being that it’s take for the most recent weeks numbers is 1.2 million. It is HIGHLY unlikely SUPERMAN can make another 25 Million in profit (not in ticket sales) so MAN OF STEEL wins.
That said, both films are definitely monetary losses because we haven’t factored in marketing costs. Typically movies like this will have a marketing budget between 100 – 200 million sometimes more (especially if its a DISNEY film). In the case of MOS there is also post box office sales (CD/DVD/BluRay/Streaming) to factor in and that is 120 million which puts MOS t total profit at around 154 million. That is not factoring any production costs for the physical disc in sell thru and the related costs but those aren’t published so we can only look at the sale figure but if we do it the same for both films we should still get a fairly balanced comparison. SUPERMAN has yet to complete it’s post box office sales cycle but it’s VERY unlikely it will bring in enough to beat out MOS considering the reception of SUPERMAN.
This piece feels like as if the author just regurgitated whatever garbage the studio put out instead of doing actual journalism. ThatParkPlace management should be HIGHLY embarrassed by this article! I very easily debunked it with public information indicating that this journalist, Montanaro, does a very pooor job.