Now that its theatrical run has wound down, many assumed the debate around James Gunn’s Superman would finally be settled. The film’s theatrical run has been winding down as it moved to digital last week and is available for streaming on HBO Max. At the box office, it earned $354.1 million domestically and $615.4 million worldwide. Warner Bros. has already announced a sequel, Man of Tomorrow, which had seemed to close the chapter on this release. Yet, industry talk sparked again after a new report claimed the movie turned a theatrical profit.
The report stated that Superman generated $125 million in profit for the studio. By comparison, Deadline reported in 2014 that 2013’s Man of Steel generated $42.7 million. On paper, Gunn’s film looks far more successful, earning nearly three times the profit. That claim reinvigorated debate, as many observers argued that the math did not add up. The same report also framed Warner Bros. as having a strong year with other projects, citing A Minecraft Movie, Sinners, and Weapons. For fans following the numbers closely, the story raised more questions than answers.
Only way the Superman makes $125 million in profit is if they’re counting tax credits, merchandise, digital sales, tie-ins, etc.
That sounds about right.
Very hard to square those numbers purely from BO receipts.
Breaking even? Even slightly profitable? Yes
$125 mil? How? pic.twitter.com/NvGP7Hoyf0
— Josh 🗽 (@supersecretjosh) September 8, 2025
Superman had a production budget of $225 million, without including marketing, which likely pushed costs closer to $330 million. Analysts generally estimate that films need to earn between two and three times their total budgets to break even, meaning this film would need around $660 million globally to avoid losses. Its present total of $615.4 million falls well short of that threshold. The report suggesting a $125 million theatrical profit first ran in Variety, but Warner Bros. still has not commented. Critics argue that it is unlikely this figure came solely from the theatrical run, meaning it possibly factored in additional revenue streams yet billed it as a box office result.
I could mathematically believe a scenario where MOS sold more tickets but Superman made more profit but TRIPLE ?!?????
That math ain’t mathing 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣
If you’re gonna lie, make it believable pic.twitter.com/HvRr0ekNyr
— Reyes Flores (@mokoloco88) September 11, 2025
For perspective, Man of Steel had the same budget and posted stronger global earnings of $670.1 million, yet generated only $42.7 million in reported profit. That comparison does not align with the $125 million profit now attached to Gunn’s Superman. If streaming rights, video-on-demand, and international licensing are included, then the higher profit figure becomes more plausible. But without such clarification, many believe the report leaves out critical context.
The conversation grew further once fans compared Gunn’s film to 2022’s Black Adam. That project carried a $190 million production budget, leading box office analysts to estimate it needed about $600 million worldwide to break even. It closed its run at roughly $390 million, and early reports suggested it lost about $50 million. Later, actor Dwayne Johnson claimed the film eventually reached a $72 million profit after ancillary revenues were factored in. Those later reports were more transparent, making clear that profits came after the theatrical run had ended. By contrast, Gunn’s film is being described as a profitable hit in theaters alone, creating skepticism.
What is Rebecca Rubin playing?
In 2022 she claimed WB needed $600M for Black Adam to BREAK EVEN on a $195M production budget and $100M marketing budget
In 2025 she claims Superman made a $125M profit on that same $600M figure, on a $225M production & $125M marketing budget pic.twitter.com/hHbzFduQEQ
— TALES PICTURES #StandwithJimmyKimmel (@PicturesTales) September 8, 2025
Once the Superman profit story circulated, social media reacted. Many questioned whether the numbers could possibly be correct, given the cost breakdown. Some of the loudest criticism did not come from the Snyder-Bros (aka fans of Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel), but from viewers keeping a close eye on industry accounting.
not even counting inflation mind you 🤣🤣
— kh (@kramwynth) September 8, 2025
Now explain how Superman made more profit while having a bigger budget and making less money than man of steel I’ll wait pic.twitter.com/RtYBGvfnGk
— Zedtoven (@wt701) September 8, 2025
Studios do retain a stronger cut of domestic grosses, and Superman has performed well at home with its $354.1 million tally. It will almost certainly be profitable when ancillary markets and merchandise are tallied. Yet, it is still understandable why many resist believing that a $125 million profit has already been realized in theaters alone. I think the bigger issue here is how film profits are reported and why some titles are labeled as losses while others are marketed as wins, even though their financial structures are nearly identical. You’ve surely heard the term “Hollywood math.”
Accurate or not, reports of Superman’s profits have reopened debate. Whether or not Gunn or Warner Bros. are orchestrating to highlight success is irrelevant until the studio clarifies what accounts for the $125 million figure. In an era when studios want to manage narratives and perpetually online fans ruthlessly scrutinize every detail, transparency remains the missing piece.
Superman is now streaming on HBO Max.
***
English (US) · 