Ranking Superman Movies By How Much They Made At The Box Office

Some movie franchises come and go rather quickly, like the three “Hangover” movies or “The Secret Life of Pets.” Others, though, keep going and going. They’re passed down from one generation to the next, with fresh eras imbuing something new in these characters that have defined post-1960 theatrical moviegoing. Franchises in this vein include “Star Wars,” the 007 films, “Planet of the Apes,” and, of course, the “Superman” films.

“Superman” movies technically begin with 1950’s “Atom Man vs. Superman” and 1951’s “Superman and the Mole-Men,” though no box office records exist for those films. However, Christopher Reeve’s initial “Superman” title in 1978 is what really kick-started the “Superman” franchise that’s still influencing modern cinema. For nearly 50 years, one of the world’s first comic book superheroes has been dazzling audiences. Times may change, cultural norms will ebb and flow, but the appeal of seeing the last son of Krypton on the big screen never flickers out.

Ranking the “Superman” movies from lowest to highest grossing at the domestic box office does make it clear that certain stretches of cinema history have been kinder to Kal-El and his cousin than others. A dismal North American financial haul can sometimes be even more damaging to this crime fighter than a bushel of Kryptonite. However, the box office highs and historic records achieved by this character also reflect how Superman never really goes out of style. Truly, this guy can leap tall buildings and box office expectations in a single bound.

Long before Milly Alcock’s Supergirl memorably crashed the final moments of James Gunn’s “Superman,” this superhero got her own solo movie that went absolutely nowhere at the box office. “Supergirl” hit theaters in November 1984 in the hopes of proving that the “Superman” brand name could spawn mutliple ongoing film franchises. Helen Slater played the titular superhero, while a staggeringly overqualified supporting cast included Peter O’Toole, Mia Farrow, and Faye Dunaway. Unfortunately for “Supergirl,” the final film was so bad and critically reviled that it scared away any moviegoers looking for superhero shenanigans over the holiday season.

More concerning, however, was that it followed up 1983’s divisive “Superman III” by just 17 months. That entry already made only slightly more than half of the domestic total of “Superman II” and its post-release reception wasn’t anywhere near good enough to make everything with the “Superman” brand name sell like hotcakes. All these problems came home to roost in the dismal theatrical run of “Supergirl,” which only totaled $14 million. That made it only the 65th highest-grossing movie of 1984, coming in behind titles like “Hot Dog … The Movie” and “Unfaithfully Yours.” Even 1984 pop culture punchline “Rhinestone” grossed more domestically.

Needless to say, “Supergirl” remains the lowest-grossing title in the “Superman” film family. 2026’s “Supergirl” reboot starring Alcock is far from a surefire hit and may end up going haywire financially, but it’s impossible to imagine that it’ll fare worse at the domestic box office than this 1984 dud.

Distirbuted by Warner Bros. Pictures but produced by cheapie cinema outfit The Cannon Group, “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace” went back for one more bite of the Christopher Reeve Superman apple. It turned out to be a fatal flaw, as the film became a financial disaster and an instant contender for “worst films of all-time” lists. That was despite a plum late July 1987 release date that, on paper, should have given it a strong launchpad for a lucrative theatrical run. 

Instead, “The Quest for Peace” only grossed $14.5 million domestically. That was only slightly more than the $13.3 million domestic opening weekend of “Superman III” four years earlier. Even though it was made on a threadbare $17 million price tag, “The Quest for Peace” was still a sizeable money-loser.

A movie this dismal was always going to be a tough sell to audiences. However, “The Quest for Peace” was not helped by soaring into theaters four years after “Superman III.” The previous three “Superman” movies hit theaters between December 1978 and June 1983. This lengthier wait for “Superman IV” meant the audience’s passion for this franchise had cooled. Plus, “Superman III” and “Supergirl” had diluted memories of the glory days of “Superman II” in the minds of moviegoers. Tremendous July 1987 competition from more profitable hits like “RoboCop” and “The Living Daylights” sealed this fourquel’s fate. The unthinkable had now occurred at the domestic box office … a Christopher Reeve “Superman” title was an indisputable box office disaster.

Though his ’70s standup routines were transgressive and boundary-pushing, comedian Richard Pryor had a firm foothold on mainstream cinema success in the early ’80s thanks to hits like “Stir Crazy.” Eventually, some executive decided that this beloved actor would be the perfect person to join the “Superman” franchise. Thus, director Richard Lester’s “Superman III” was born, which paired up Reeve’s Man of Steel with a computer whiz played by Pryor. The result was an infinitely sillier picture than the days of Richard Donnor’s first, reverent “Superman” movie from 1978 — just look at that opening sequence consisting solely of lengthy slapstick. 

This change in tone has led “Superman III” to become a divisive movie among “Superman” fans. It would also explain why the film didn’t have anywhere near the enduring legs of its two predecessors at the box office. Nevertheless, “Superman III” was still a solid moneymaker in its domestic run, even on a $39 million budget (a lofty price tag for an early ’80s tentpole). With $60 million domestically, “Superman III” made noticeably less than its predecessors, both of which cleared $100 million in North America.

Among all 1983 releases, “Superman III” was the 12th highest-grossing title of the year, outgrossing films like “Never Say Never Again,” “Scarface,” and “Jaws 3-D.” It was also the fourth-biggest movie Pryor ever appeared in, and exposed him to a whole new generation of audiences. “Superman III” saw this franchise wilting in its box office prowess but still proving reasonably mighty.

“Superman II” entered theaters in June 1981 on a wave of bad publicity and behind-the-scenes drama. Director Richard Lester took over the project after original helmer Richard Donner left, necessitating awkward maneuvers to stitch together two disparate creative visions for the film. Between that and the fact that sequels weren’t nearly as common in 1981 as they are in the 2020s, “Superman II” had all the ingredients for an embarrassing flop.

Inevitably, “Superman II” couldn’t hope to match or exceed its predecessor’s box office gross, since “Superman” was the first big-budget live-action movie adaptation of this iconic character. However, “Superman II” still did outstanding business with a $108 million domestic total. The film’s financial clout was clear from the start when it shattered the domestic box office records for biggest opening weekend and week grosses. All that backstage bad blood hadn’t diminished one iota of people’s love for Christopher Reeve’s Clark Kent/Superman. 

Goodwill from the first “Superman” was what drove people to the multiplexes, not eagerness to see a botched feature play out on the silver screen. Only two other releases, “Raiders of the Lost Ark” and “On Golden Pond,” outgrossed “Superman II” at the domestic box office that year. It was a tremendous haul that only came in $26 million behind the domestic total of the original “Superman.” After all the chaos of bringing it to the big screen, “Superman II” had a practically ideal box office run.

“You will believe a man can fly.” That’s what the posters and promos for “Superman” promised back in 1978. Given the revolution in visual effects and big blockbuster storytelling that was occurring in this era with “Jaws” and “Star Wars,” that sounded less like hyperbolic showmanship and more like a guarantee you could take to the bank. Christopher Reeve’s inaugural title as Clark Kent/Superman entered a pop culture landscape where costly superhero movies basically didn’t exist. There were real concerns over whether or not audiences would come to see this material on the big screen and a project this expensive could make its budget back.

To say “Superman” was a massive hit for Warner Bros. was a tremendous understatement. At the end of 1978, just a few weeks into its run, “Superman” was cited by the New York Times as the latest example of box office “super-grossers,” like “The Godfather” and “Jaws,” that were taking over Hollywood. Passing that judgment so early in its theatrical run turned out to be a wise move. The eventual domestic total of “Superman” was $134.5 million, making it one of the biggest movies of all time in the late 1970s.

Even just domestically, “Superman” had done roughly 2.5 times its massive $55 million budget (for comparison’s sake, “Star Wars” cost $11 million and “Jaws” cost $9 million). Here was proof that big-budget movies of this scale could be profitable. “Superman” soared above all expectations and changed the game.

Superman had been absent from the big screen for roughly two decades when “Superman Returns” arrived in June 2006, but both the popularity of “Smallville” and 2000s superhero movie hits like “Spider-Man” suggested this character could still make an impact. “X-Men” director Bryan Singer was recruited to helm this new vision of Superman, with Brandon Routh taking on the mantle of Clark Kent/Superman, while his supporting players included Kevin Spacey, Kate Bosworth, and James Marsden.

With an estimated $232 million budget, the pressure was on for “Superman Returns” to be a historic smash for Warner Bros. In the end, it only grossed $200 million domestically, slightly behind the North American haul of Singer’s much cheaper superhero movie “X2” from three years earlier. “Returns” also came in a few million behind the domestic gross of “Batman Begins,” despite costing $82 million more to produce.

Competition from other summer 2006 titles like “Cars” and “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” certainly didn’t help “Returns” get a financial foothold. However, the biggest issue “Superman Returns” faced wasn’t Lightning McQueen. It was that the film was too obsessed with the past. Endless homages to the original Christopher Reeve films (including bringing back Marlon Brando’s image as Jor-El) limited the movie’s appeal compared to the inviting blank slate of “Batman Begins.” Add in a somber tone and divisive audience responses, and it’s no wonder “Superman Returns” didn’t meet expectations. 

Though Henry Cavill’s Clark Kent/Superman wasn’t substantially highlighted in the pre-release posters or trailers for “Justice League,” everyone knew he would be back for this superhero team-up. The ending of “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” even teased his resurrection. But speculation over whether or not Superman would indeed come back for the first live-action Justice League movie, not to mention goodwill from fellow 2017 DC Comics feature “Wonder Woman,” wasn’t enough to get people invested in “Justice League.”

“Batman v Superman” had just so profoundly burned audiences that any direct continuation of that series (even with a lighter tone implemented by “Justice League” reshoots helmer Joss Whedon) was going to have a tough time resonating with the broader public. In a vacuum, the $229 million domestic gross put up by “Justice League” wasn’t the end of the world. But considering the film cost a massive $300 million to make, such a meek haul was not going to cut it. Coming in over $100 million beneath the domestic total of “BvS” from 20 months earlier, despite showcasing more DC superhero legends, was also frustrating.

The movie allegedly lost tens of millions for Warner Bros., a rarity for 2010s superhero films. Despite not factoring into the marketing campaign, the problems of “Justice League” still damaged Superman, considering all the jokes about Henry Cavill’s digitally altered upper lip (a byproduct of the reshoots) in the final film.

Seven years after “Superman Returns,” Warner Bros. returned with another “Superman” reboot from a superhero movie veteran — this time, “Watchmen” helmer Zack Snyder. His darker vision of Kal-El resulted in 2013’s “Man of Steel,” which cost $225 million to make and hoped to kick off the DC Extended Universe in style. Preceded by an 11-month-long marketing campaign that started with a pair of teasers playing at various screenings of “The Dark Knight Rises,” The marketing campaign for “Man of Steel” was determined to tell audiences that this was a wholly different take on the character that Christopher Reeve famously originated on-screen. 

Over opening weekend, “Man of Steel” certainly accomplished its goal of making some noise at the box office. Its first three days of box office grosses amounted to $116 million (along with another $12 million made at Wal-Mart-sponsored Thusday preview screenings), by far the biggest domestic June bow in history at that point. Its initial domestic bow also gave it the sixth-biggest superhero movie opening ever in North America at the time of its release.

Unfortunately, in its second domestic frame, “Man of Steel” fell a hefty 68% from that $128 million debut. With divisive word-of-mouth, it proved more front-loaded than usual for an early 2010s superhero movie. Still, a hefty $291 million domestic total left “Superman Returns” in the dust. That haul for “Man of Steel” vividly signified Superman could still make a mint in the crowded superhero movie landscape of the 2010s.

“Superman Returns” opened in 2006 during an initial gold rush for superhero titles. 2025’s “Superman,” meanwhile, hit multiplexes during a dreary, uncertain time for the genre. Flops like “The Marvels” and “The Flash” made it clear audiences wouldn’t show up in theaters for just any live-action Marvel or DC adaptation anymore. Could the umpteenth “Superman” reboot really make a splash in this environment? 

The answer turned out to be a resounding “yes.” Over its first three days of domestic play, “Superman” grossed $125 million, nearly equaling the $128 million bow for “Man of Steel” from 12 years earlier. It was also the first time in eight years (since “Wonder Woman”) that a DC Comics movie had cracked $100 million+ on opening weekend in North America.

Over the next few days, though, “Superman” really began to flex its domestic box office muscles. Its day-to-day holds during the week were significantly better than usual for a July superhero film. This trend suggested great word-of-mouth was working in the movie’s favor and inspiring people to give what may have seemed like a redundant cash grab a chance. Over its second North American weekend, it grossed another $57 million for a terrific 54% decline from opening weekend. Now having grossed more than $300 million after 24 days of release (at press time), “Superman” is poised to have a great run for the rest of summer 2025. Expect this superhero to beat the odds for current comic book movies and continue soaring higher and higher on this list. 

38 years after Superman first flew in a big-budget movie, he got to rub shoulders with another DC Comics heavyweight, Batman, on the big screen for the first time. That momentous occasion came in 2016’s “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice,” which also featured Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot debuting as Bruce Wayne/Batman and Diana Prince/Wonder Woman, respectively, in the DC Extended Universe. This jam-packed Zack Snyder directorial effort was marketed extensively and positioned as a massively important project for this franchise.

Over its first three days of release, “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” continued the historical trend of “Superman” movies setting domestic box office opening records. With a $166 million opening, “Batman v Superman” had the biggest North American March launch in history and the second-biggest Warner Bros. opening in this territory. It was a tremendous start that was also only down 13% from the domestic opening of “Avengers: Age of Ultron” 10 months earlier.

However, poor word-of-mouth ensured that “Batman v Superman” collapsed 69% in its second weekend, one of the largest declines ever for a comic book movie. The bleeding didn’t stop after that second frame, as the film fell just shy of doubling its hefty debut with a final $330 million North American gross. While ominously front-loaded (which would eventually harm “Justice League”), “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” did at least become the first film starring Superman to exceed $300 million domestically.