Vampires seem to be all the rage today, theaters, TV and just about every book store out there. You just can’t get away anymore and while they’ve been here for a very long time, it’s only recently that blood-suckers become so popular with mainstream audiences.

Today we’ll take a look at the top 10 most successful vampire movies at the box office in North America. Now we all know what will be found at the top, but I always say the journey is more important than the destination so if you’re not a Twilight fan just enjoy this up to the #5 spot.

10. Underworld: Evolution (2006) $62.3 million – There’s a very good reason why I chose North American box office instead of worldwide and it involves Underworld: Evolution. This top 10 would look about the same with a very important difference, Blade: Trinity would be 10th and I wanted an Underworld film here (since we already have two other Blade flicks). The original 2003 Underworld was a well made genre flick that managed to blend vampires and werewolves in a modern Romeo and Juliet story. If there ever was a Twilight equivalent for guys, this would probably be it. Underworld: Evolution was a worthy sequel that took the series in a somewhat different direction (leaving Romeo and Juliet behind). Underworld: Awakening, the 4th film, is set to open in just 2 months.

9. Blade (1998) $70 million – A few months back I wrote a series of posts about superheroes and there I gave Blade credit for being the movie that made Hollywood studios have faith in superheroes again. Without the original Blade, Marvel Studios would not be the same today. The fact that he’s a kick-ass half-vampire, half-human, vampire hunter is just a bonus and for me personally, a damn good enough reason to watch Blade again.

8. Blade 2 (2002) $82 million – A bit more visually impressive thanks to director Guillermo del Toro, Blade 2 is a great sequel followed by a not so great 3rd part (Blade: Trinity) that managed to kill the series.

7. Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992) $82.5 million – If you have even the slightest interest in vampires and you haven’t seen this movie yet, do yourself a favor and check it out. Unless you’re a 13 year old girl, when you think vampires, Dracula comes to mind and for good reason. According to Wikipedia, as of 2009, around 217 films featured Dracula in a major role. The version we’re talking about here was directed by Francis Ford Coppola and starred Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Anthony Hopkins and Keanu Reeves among others.

6. Interview with the Vampire (1994) $105.2 million – Based on the novel written by Anne Rice and published in 1976, this is among the best vampire movies out there. Starring Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, a very young Kirsten Dunst, and Antonio Banderas, this is one flick you don’t want to miss. Adjusted for inflation, Interview with the Vampire would have over $200 million today.

5. Van Helsing (2004) $120.1 million – This is not a good movie, not much else you need to know here. If you were lucky enough to skip this back when it came out then I envy you and know that you haven’t missed anything.

4. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 (2011) $139.5 million (so far) – If you absolutely hate Twilight there’s not much else for you here (just skip to the end), everyone else, keep reading. As you probably know this movie just came out so the number shown above is an opening weekend estimate. Later today the actual numbers will come out and then I’ll write a full report, explaining in more detail what $139.5 million (or more) actually means for this series and box office in general.

3. Twilight (2008) $192.7 million – One might say that the vampires featured in this series are a joke to real blood-suckers. Fortunately there are no real vampires out there so at the end of the day credit must be given to the movie that turned a niche genre into a mainstream phenomenon.

2. The Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009) $296.6 million – No matter how much one hates this series, there are things that just can’t be argued. You don’t grow $100 million in just a year unless your movie really has something going. It might not be aimed at everyone but it definitely hits the right chords with its target audience.

1. The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (2010) $300.5 million – It takes a lot of strength for a movie to reach a ceiling like this series did and manage to remain up there. Like it or not, when it comes to box office this is as close as a studio has ever got to a Harry Potter-like hit.

Before I close, there are a few vampire movies out there that maybe came out a very long time ago when tickets were a lot cheaper or just never managed to catch a big enough audience, so I feel that I have to at least mention them here. An obvious choice is the 1931 Dracula starring the late Bela Lugosi, simply a must see for every vampire fan out there. The original 1985 Fright Night as well as the 2011 remake should also be seen, in that order if possible. Then there’s the Swedish masterpiece Let the Right One In (2008) and trust me, you need to see this. Finally, while not a particularly great film, it was definitely a big hit back in 1979. Adjusted for inflation, Love at First Bite would have $139.1 million today.

I probably missed more than a few great ones so feel free to comment below and name your favorite vampire movie.

Read similar posts to Vampires at the Box Office at Filmonic

This week we go over 9 movies from 2003 to 2005, 6 of which are based on Marvel properties, just to give you an idea how much they’ve grown since Blade in 1998. Among the 9 we get a bunch of sequels, a reboot, two utterly terrible spin-offs, one big red hero, one bigger green hero and an original animated flick from Pixar.

After hitting the jackpot with X-Men in 2000, sequel was the name of the game for Fox. Just three years later X2: X-Men United came out to even greater success, opening with $85.5 million (X-Men had $54.4M) and grossing $214.9 million in North America and $407.2 million worldwide. After making a good deal more money then the first one (something very very rare back then with superhero sequels) and receiving even better fan and critical reception, a 3rd entry was right around the corner. What could possibly go wrong, right?

In June that same year Universal took another stab at the superhero genre with Hulk. Directed by Ang Lee, it turned out to be a disappointment for fans and based on the $62.1 million opening, a missed opportunity money wise. With just $132.1 million in North America and $245.3 million worldwide on a $137 million budget (second most expensive superhero movie at the time), Universal were not happy and everyone blamed director Ang Lee. You see, he tried to make a very talky movie out of a very smashy property, that was his big mistake. Personally I blame Universal since they hired him and they should have kept an eye on the project.

There are very popular superheroes like Hulk, Batman, X-Men and so on and then there’s Hellboy, a Dark Horse comic hero unknown to many, at least until the movie came out in 2004. Released by Sony under the direction of Blade 2 director, Guillermo Del Toro, while not a huge hit ($99.3 million worldwide on a $66 million budget), Hellboy took on a cult following. Great DVD sales and rentals turned sequel talk from fantasy to reality.

Now we get to the reboot I was mentioning in the intro. I’m going to burst a few bubbles here, this ain’t the very long anticipated return of Batman, nope, you’ll have to wait a bit more for that cause in 2004 we had The Punisher. But why call it a reboot? Well you see, back in 1989 there was another The Punisher starring Dolph Lundgren that never made it into theaters in the US (hence why it wasn’t mentioned by me before). This new Punisher, while it got released on the big screen, wasn’t much to write home about. Having made only $54.7 million worldwide on a $33 million budget, Lionsgate decided to give the character a break until they could figure out where they’ll take him from there (sequel or another reboot).

On June 30th 2004, Spider-Man 2, the highly anticipated sequel of the arguably most popular superhero movie at the time, was released to glowing reviews eclipsing the first one. This became the new benchmark of the genre, loved by fans and even today considered among the best superhero movies ever to be brought to the big screen. Grossing $373.5 million in North America and $783.7 million worldwide, it became second only to Spider-Man ($403.7 and $821.7M) as the highest superhero money earner.

At this point DC Comics characters were out of the loop with Marvel dominating the field thanks to the likes of X-Men or Spidey. With the new Batman reboot in production, Warner decided to prepare audiences with a spin-off centered around catwomen. The name of the movie was, well, Catwomen and it bombed big time. On a budget of $100 million, it only made $40 million in North America and $82 million worldwide.

So far we’ve seen how popular established characters can become if done right, but how about an original animated superhero movie done by the masters of animation themselves. Yep, I’m talking about The Incredibles, a fantastic movie on itself that so happened to be animated and feature superheroes. It became the 3rd highest grossing in the genre with a stunning $261.4 million in North America and $631.4 million worldwide. So Disney and Pixar, how much longer do we have to wait for that Incredibles sequel, aye?

With the exception of the better forgotten Catwomen, 2004 featured a stellar lineup thanks to Hellboy, Spider-Man 2 and The Incredibles, unfortunately not everything that starts great has to end the same way. We just had to finish the year on a bad note thanks to New Line and their Blade: Trinity, a rushed sequel panned by critics and hatted by fans, not to mention it made the least amount of money out of the trilogy ($128.9 million worldwide), helped in no small part by a bad release window (December). This was more then enough to put the series on an indefinite hiatus. Recently there have been rumors of a 4th Blade movie, but we’ll see how likely that is over the upcoming months.

And last but not… hell, this is definitely also least, I’m talking about Elektra after all, the horrible horrible Daredevil spin-off. So bad that it makes Daredevil seem like a masterpiece. $24.4 million in North America and $56.6 million worldwide is what this made and I can’t shake the feeling it should have been a straight to DVD affair.

In Part 7 we explore the new beginning of a beloved character, one that would mark a new turning point for superhero movies. I’ll give you a hint, he has a thing for bats.

- Superheroes at the box office (Part 1)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 2)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 3)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 4)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 5)

Read similar posts to Superheroes at the box office (Part 6) at Filmonic

In Part 4 we lost Batman but got Blade, a second-rate superhero that showed Hollywood how a seriously taken source material and genuinely good movie can turn into a successful property, regardless of how famous it was to begin with. For the first time, you didn’t need Superman or Batman to make a hit.

So Blade turned a lot of heads in 1998 and gave 20th Century Fox the courage to finally shell out $75 million so that X-Men could start filming after years of delays (Bryan Singer signed on to direct the picture way back in 1996). Initially set to open in December 2000, X-Men was moved to July and considering filming just started in September, this was definitely on a very tight schedule. But before we go forward with X-Men, we still got 1999 and 2 superhero movies to talk about.

Black Mask was a movie made way back in 1996 that opened in North America on May 14th 1999 starring Jet Li. The only reason this finally got released is because Jet Li was starting to become popular thanks to his role in Lethal Weapon 4 just a year before. Black Mask only made $12.5 million. A few months later it was time for superhero comedy Mystery Men to bomb at the box office with $29.7 million in North America. Yep, 1999 was not a good year for heroes of the super kind.

X-Men opened on July 14th 2000 with the 5th highest opening weekend at the time, $54.4 million and outstanding reviews and praise from fans alike. This was everything Fox wanted it to be and the franchise potential was enormous. X-Men went on to gross $157.3 million in North America and $296.3 million worldwide. The Marvel revolution was here.

In November 2000 an original superhero created by the mind of M. Night Shyamalan was unleashed in Unbreakable. This was a very different take on the genre but it still received good reviews and great fan appreciation. $95 million in North America and $248.1 million worldwide made Unbreakable one of the bigger hits of that year.

2001 was almost empty with only 1993 Hong Kong movie, Iron Monkey, out in North America grossing just $14.7 million.

2002 was a landmark moment for the superhero genre with Blade returning and Spider-Man finally getting his big screen debut after years of going nowhere. Directed by the now famous Guillermo del Toro, Blade II opened March 22nd with $32.5 million and went on to make $82.3 million in North America and 155 million worldwide. At this point Wesley Snipes and Blade were here to stay, at least until New Line would pull a Superman 3 on it, but more about that at a later time.

Stuck in development hell for over two decades, Sony Pictures finally bought the Spider-Men movie license in 1999 along with a James Cameron original scriptment (he tried to get the project up way back in 1990). After considering directors like Roland Emmerich (Independence Day, 2012), Tim Burton (Batman, Batman Returns), Chris Columbus (Home Alone, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone) or David Fincher (Alien 3, Fight Club), they finally went with must less famous Sam Raimi (Evil Dead) in 2000, a long time fan of the comics. Filming took place from January to June 2001 and Spider-Men was set to open in February 2002. After previewing an unfinished version of the movie and realizing the huge potential they had with a summer release, Sony moved the date to May 3rd 2002.

May 3rd 2002, the date Spider-Man, arguably one of the big three most popular superheroes in the world (Batman and Superman being the others), finally opened and what an opening that was. $114.8 million, the biggest weekend ever at the time and it would not stop there. Spider-Man became the best reviewed superhero movie ever, considered by both fans and critics the finest flick to ever feature a superhero. Spidey went on to gross 403.7 million in North America (5th highest back then) and $821.7 million worldwide. Sony now had the biggest hero in town and they wanted to milk it to the last drop. A sequel was obviously on the way, but not for another 2 years, in the meantime other studios tried their luck at this hero thing, now more interesting then ever before.

Warner Bros, the studio that managed to ruin both Superman and Batman in little over a decades, released The Powerpuff Girls Movie in 2002. Based on the popular Cartoon Network series, it made $11.4 million. Hard at work on rebooting their then tarnished superheroes, Warner were not out of the game yet.

On February 14th 2003 Fox unleashed another Marvel superhero on the big screen, Daredevil starring Ben Affleck. It turned out a mediocre flick but it did gross 102.5 million in North America and $179.1 million worldwide. Instead of following it with a sequel, Fox were planning to release a spin-off 2 years later, a disaster we’ll talk about in Part 6.

- Superheroes at the box office (Part 1)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 2)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 3)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 4)

Read similar posts to Superheroes at the box office (Part 5) at Filmonic

In Part 3 of our look at superheroes at the box office Batman was still the main topic of conversation, while in this feature he definitely starts to takes a backseat. By now everyone knows what came after Batman Forever and while it ain’t pretty, we have to remind ourselves of this dreaded event because only by knowing the past, can you prepare for the future… and not make the same mistake twice. Obviously, Warner Bros. didn’t learn anything from the Superman fiasco.

Before we get to Batman and Robin in 1997, we still have 2 years to go over and we start at June 30th 1995, one of the rare dates that had 2 superhero movies opening at the same time. The first was Mighty Morphin’s Power Rangers, a movie based on the popular 90′s Fox Kids show, and the second movie was Judge Dredd, a $90 million Silvester Stallone Buena Vista (Disney) R-rated action movie based on the popular British comics. Neither of them was #1 that weekend (Apollo 13 was, with more than double both their takings) and with $38.1 million from Power Rangers and $34.6 million for Judge Dredd in North America, there wasn’t much left to write home about. Power Rangers got another shot with a sequel in 1997, but that was a box office bomb with just $8.3 million.

1996 followed with The Phantom, The Crow: City of Angels and Barb Wire, all bad movies and equally unsuccessful at the box office with numbers from $3.7 million (for Barb Wire) to $17.9 for The Crow sequel.

After so much turd, the waiting for the next Batman was finally over in the summer of 1997. Since we were on the subject of turds, Batman and Robin was to become the biggest of them all. Costing a whopping $125 million (one of the most expensive movies at the time), the adventure of Batman, Robin and Batgirl (yes, they had to go that far) made for an excruciating movie that turned into a box office bomb, grossing only $107.3 million in North America and $238.2 million worldwide. So when did all the sucking start? Well, some would say the second Robin entered the series but since we are talking about Batman and Robin here, I’ll start with the recasting of the dark knight with George Clooney. Then there was a goofy Arnold Schwarzenegger playing Mr. Freeze and Uma Thurman was Poison Ivy. Did I mention they got Batgirl in there also? Alicia Silverstone had the “honor” of playing her. Basically everything turned into a bad Saturday morning live-action cartoon that killed that Batman movie franchise. It was time for a reboot that would take Warner 8 years to get round to, but what a reboot that was.

So with both Superman and Batman out, there weren’t that many high profile superheroes to exploit anymore. I mean yeah, there was Spider-Man but that was stuck in development hell since before Superman (1978) came out. Bringing Spidy to the big screen was considered, at the time, too expensive and hard to shot with the technology they had back then. So we were left with second-rate superheroes for three more years.

But, it was one of this second-rate superheroes that started to turn the tide again for the genre. Spawn in 1997 wasn’t that hero but it was certainly not a bad effort. It was a mediocre movie in a time when superheroes needed great movies in order to rise again. Grossing $54.4 million in North America and $87.8 million worldwide, it was a step at least partially in a somewhat good direction. Then came Steel and which was definitely ten steps back, grossing only $1.7 million. Top that!

1998 was the year of hope with not one but TWO good superhero movies. After so many years of darkness, a ray of light was finally on the horizon for this once respected genre. Think of it this way, you know how we hate movies based on games today? Well that’s basically how things were at the time with superheroes in movies.

The Mask of Zorro opened on July 17th 1998 to warm reception and a total of $94 million in North America and $250.2 million worldwide. So what was the secret to go from Steel to The Mask of Zorro? Well for starters Sony and Columbia Pictures got competent people to make this movie, Martin Campbell directed (he previously did GoldenEye and this year he made Green Lantern, according to critics, not his best effort) and a good cast to boot lead by Oscar winner Anthony Hopkins starring as an older version of the titular hero. Steven Spielberg was also an executive producer on The Mask of Zorro, and years later a sequel followed.

So while Zorro was a hit, he wasn’t exactly what the superhero fans out there wanted, actually pretty far from it. It wasn’t Zorro but Blade on August 21st, that turned the tide for the superhero genre. A Marvel Comics hero for once (Superman and Batman are DC Comics), Blade was an instant hit with the fans and without it, Marvel would be in a very different position right now. Blade made $70 million in North America and $131.1 million, so not a huge hit money wise but what really mattered here is that Blade was a competent movie that actually followed the source material and represented the hero as he should be, in an R-rated flick. Blade spawned 2 more sequels in the years to come and single-handedly greenlit projects like X-Men, Spider-Man and other Marvel properties that would become so popular in the years to come.

In Part 5 the Marvel revolution finally gets under-way….

- Superheroes at the box office (Part 1)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 2)
- Superheroes at the box office (Part 3)

Read similar posts to Superheroes at the box office (Part 4) at Filmonic

It’s still the weekend and there’s still no worthy news so here’s another cool fan trailer. It’s from the same guy who made The Incredible Hulk vs. Wolverine, but this time Batman faces off against Blade, defying not only studio rights but also comic book worlds.

You can see more videos like this on YouTube user silverlightsaber’s account by clicking here!

Read similar posts to The Dark Knight vs. Blade trailer at Filmonic

Who knew, when the first Blade film by Stephen Norrington debuted in 1998, that it would legitimize Marvel comic properties in the eyes of the movie-going public? Without Blade, we wouldn’t have had the Marvel we have today, ramping up towards a unified cinematic universe.

On the other side of the coin, Wesley Snipes’ portrayal of the character became so iconic that he became a tad too full of himself, leading rumors of on-set tension by the time Blade: Trinity swung through theaters to put the final nail in the coffin stake in the chest of the franchise.

Norrington, who was replaced by Guillermo Del Toro for Blade 2, went on to direct The League Of Extraordinary Gentleman, clashing with Sean Connery and disappearing from the directing landscape the hollowed husk of a man who turned the Alan Moore franchise with super potential into the horrible film that no one had fun making or watching.

As of last December, Norrington announced his return with a “reinvention” of James O’Barr’s The Crow, for better or for worse, and he’s also lining up a return to the world of Blade…just not featuring the Blade character.

In the first film, Stephen Dorff (currently in theaters as Homer in Public Enemies), played a younger vampire lusting after complete power over the vampire race as the legendary Blood God. Spoiler alert: Blade stops him, but that’s not enough to stop Dorff and and Norrington from launching a whole trilogy based on the fanger.

Mania.com reports:

Now Norrington told Comics2Film at Mania.com exclusively that he is planning a return to the ‘Blade’ franchise following his work on the new reinvention of ‘The Crow’.

His leading man of choice is Stephen Dorff, who co-starred as the megalomaniacal Deacon Frost in the film. Of course, Frost apparently died at the end of the first movie as Blade cut him down just as he was about to transform into a vampire god.

Dorff told UK’s The Sunday Mail that the new movie would be “a prequel to the Blade movies, Deacon’s story. It’s a new trilogy the director has created. It will [be] cool.”

Norrington confirmed the news although said the movie is “not exactly how the article describes but close.”

The director credits Dorff with coming up with the idea for the new project, which “has evolved into a very interesting story.”

While that evolution may have carried it away from the source material, Norrington tells us the film is definitely envisioned as part of the existing mythology. “The linkage to ‘Blade’ is still big in the equation.”

This is still a few years away, since we won’t hear about any pre-production news until after The Crow is wrapped (and, oh, there are dozens of ways of screwing up The Crow franchise, this coming from a guy who has read Rob Zombie’s rejected The Crow: 2037).

What do you think? Is the vampire-craze going to last long enough for a Stephen Dorff vampire trilogy to have any sort of draw?

Read similar posts to Blade Spin-Off Trilogy Will Not Feature Blade at Filmonic