Infinity War on TV earlier and it's still 100x better than anything in Phase 4 except NWH.
Hope Kang can pull it together.
Hope Kang can pull it together.
*** MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE *** [Staff message on OP]
3,736,568 Views |
28789 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by RikkiTikkaTagem
The Porkchop Express said:Sorry I didn't see your message. That's a deal. If you want to back out, please consider that Kamala Khan is Marvel's first-ever Muslim superhero, and there are 1.9 billion Muslims on this planet.TCTTS said:The Porkchop Express said:how about $570 million worldwide?TCTTS said:The Porkchop Express said:$100 to the charity of the winner's choice.TCTTS said:The Porkchop Express said:
I'd bet you just about anything that The Marvels ends up being one of the MCU's lowest total box office earners.
Here's the list of MCU box office all-time global takes. I'm not sure what you mean by "one of the lowest" exactly, but the 10th-lowest is Antman and the Wasp at $623 million worldwide.
https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/Marvel-Cinematic-Universe#tab=summary&franchise_movies_overview=od5
All said and done, The Marvels will definitely be below Ant-Man and the Wasp / $623M worldwide. I'm going to say it'll make more than Thor ($449M ww), but somewhere under Ant-Man and the Wasp. I don't know how, exactly, you want to define the bet, but whatever it is, I'll likely take it.
$585M and you have a deal. That's Iron Man's worldwide. I say The Marvels will do less than that.
And yet hardly any of them watched Ms. Marvel.
Will be reading all that and posting later tonight.
You guys should go off US box office to deal with inflation.
I'm so confident in my bet that I'm not even worried about inflation.
Do it right.TCTTS said:The Porkchop Express said:Sorry I didn't see your message. That's a deal. If you want to back out, please consider that Kamala Khan is Marvel's first-ever Muslim superhero, and there are 1.9 billion Muslims on this planet.TCTTS said:The Porkchop Express said:how about $570 million worldwide?TCTTS said:The Porkchop Express said:$100 to the charity of the winner's choice.TCTTS said:The Porkchop Express said:
I'd bet you just about anything that The Marvels ends up being one of the MCU's lowest total box office earners.
Here's the list of MCU box office all-time global takes. I'm not sure what you mean by "one of the lowest" exactly, but the 10th-lowest is Antman and the Wasp at $623 million worldwide.
https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/Marvel-Cinematic-Universe#tab=summary&franchise_movies_overview=od5
All said and done, The Marvels will definitely be below Ant-Man and the Wasp / $623M worldwide. I'm going to say it'll make more than Thor ($449M ww), but somewhere under Ant-Man and the Wasp. I don't know how, exactly, you want to define the bet, but whatever it is, I'll likely take it.
$585M and you have a deal. That's Iron Man's worldwide. I say The Marvels will do less than that.
And yet hardly any of them watched Ms. Marvel.
Phat32 said:
Infinity War on TV earlier and it's still 100x better than anything in Phase 4 except NWH.
Hope Kang can pull it together.
Except NWH is produced by Sony. Not sure I would even count that
No Way Home is definitely part of the MCU/Phase 4, and Marvel is heavily involved with each of the Tom Holland Spider-Man movies. Sony and Disney have a unique, collaborative licensing deal/partnership worked out for the character, where Disney is not only involved creatively, but also financed 25% of No Way Home / received 25% of the profits.
EXCLU: After facing off with aliens in NOPE and zombies in THE WALKING DEAD, Steven Yeun is now ready to face off against some superheroes in the MCU as he has joined Marvel's THUNDERBOLTS pic in a secret role expected to be significant in future films https://t.co/6XjI6vHtPj
— Justin Kroll (@krolljvar) February 23, 2023
Nobody jumped to mind, but maybe Radioactive Man?
Seeing some speculation he could be Amadeus Cho, one of the newer Hulks. That could make sense if he was basically cast as the next gen Hulk for future Avengers tesmups.
Seeing some speculation he could be Amadeus Cho, one of the newer Hulks. That could make sense if he was basically cast as the next gen Hulk for future Avengers tesmups.
I know nothing about the character, but the speculation I'm seeing the most is The Sentry.
that would be crazy
I remember really liking the miniseries that introduced him, though I haven't read it since it came out
I remember really liking the miniseries that introduced him, though I haven't read it since it came out
AliasMan02 said:
Nobody jumped to mind, but maybe Radioactive Man?
Seeing some speculation he could be Amadeus Cho, one of the newer Hulks. That could make sense if he was basically cast as the next gen Hulk for future Avengers tesmups.
Re: Cho, seen that speculation as well, but feel like he might be a bit old for that. Not that I have a better suggestion of who he might be.
Hoping the higher ups learn the right lessons from this. The Marvels getting delayed and the Disney + shows getting spread out does give me hope. https://t.co/YhDxPALIr9
— oficialy Verfied🍥 (@heavyspoilers) February 25, 2023
Marvel exhaustion
Spider-Man 2 video game will reinvigorate the marvel hype train
Think people are just getting tired
Spider-Man 2 video game will reinvigorate the marvel hype train
Think people are just getting tired
Looking back, the period from basically Captain America, Winter Soldier to Avengers Endgame was basically nothing but solid movies. 12-14 movies (I would argue Avengers 2 is the only bad movie in this group, I'm sure others have different opinions) over 5 years.
Has any other studio ever done anything like that?
Has any other studio ever done anything like that?
My kids had Infinity War on today and I caught a good chunk of it while doing things around the house….haven't seen any of it since we first saw it last year….
It's still amazing after seeing it for the first time….hell it may even be more amazing after seeing everything in Phase 4 and now Quantumania….
I simply just don't think they'll ever be able to pull anything off like that again…..I have hopes…..but there was plenty of moments today re-watching something I've already seen and still enjoying it more than 95% of all my first viewings of Phase 4 films…..
It's still amazing after seeing it for the first time….hell it may even be more amazing after seeing everything in Phase 4 and now Quantumania….
I simply just don't think they'll ever be able to pull anything off like that again…..I have hopes…..but there was plenty of moments today re-watching something I've already seen and still enjoying it more than 95% of all my first viewings of Phase 4 films…..
I legitimately cannot believe Phase 4 was so pointless. I remember early on, around when Shang-Chi came out there were already discussions about how uncohesive things felt. But I think a lot of us figured NWH and/or MoM would get things rocking with the multiverse. I don't think any of us would've guessed that the entirety of phase 4 would drift by without an on-screen introduction from the next big bad guy.C@LAg said:
phase 4 was utterly pointless, and if they are able to rearrange Phase 5 so much already at this point (delays, sifting projects, etc), it is doubtful they have a plan to really right the ship at this time.
It goes back to a discussion in another thread, but it's about risk. The bar is so high and making movies that meet expectations (star power, visuals, etc.) is so expensive the reaction is to play it safe and grind. Because no matter how badly it underperforms, Quantumania isn't going to be such a bust that it sinks the MCU or Marvel Studios. It's going to make money.
Now if Marvel were to decide their next phase is going to revolve around a newly created character, or really bet big on a great script for a Doc Samson movie with some unknown in the role, it could be a surprise hit but it could also lose hundreds of millions. They're not gonna do that.
They have shareholders to think of. Selling Kang, Secret Invaders, Captain Marvel, etc. as the tentpoles is easy to justify in a financial analysis. And that's not to say those things aren't or won't be great... they're just less risky than some of the alternatives.
It's also super easy to sell financials of doing MORE vs doing less. Doing 4 formulaic movies a year that all clear $150 million in profit sounds a lot better than doing 1 really great movie that clears $500 million, I'm sure.
Now if Marvel were to decide their next phase is going to revolve around a newly created character, or really bet big on a great script for a Doc Samson movie with some unknown in the role, it could be a surprise hit but it could also lose hundreds of millions. They're not gonna do that.
They have shareholders to think of. Selling Kang, Secret Invaders, Captain Marvel, etc. as the tentpoles is easy to justify in a financial analysis. And that's not to say those things aren't or won't be great... they're just less risky than some of the alternatives.
It's also super easy to sell financials of doing MORE vs doing less. Doing 4 formulaic movies a year that all clear $150 million in profit sounds a lot better than doing 1 really great movie that clears $500 million, I'm sure.
I get what you're saying and I'd agree 100% if it was any other property (even Star Wars falls under this idea).AliasMan02 said:
It goes back to a discussion in another thread, but it's about risk. The bar is so high and making movies that meet expectations (star power, visuals, etc.) is so expensive the reaction is to play it safe and grind. Because no matter how badly it underperforms, Quantumania isn't going to be such a bust that it sinks the MCU or Marvel Studios. It's going to make money.
Now if Marvel were to decide their next phase is going to revolve around a newly created character, or really bet big on a great script for a Doc Samson movie with some unknown in the role, it could be a surprise hit but it could also lose hundreds of millions. They're not gonna do that.
They have shareholders to think of. Selling Kang, Secret Invaders, Captain Marvel, etc. as the tentpoles is easy to justify in a financial analysis. And that's not to say those things aren't or won't be great... they're just less risky than some of the alternatives.
It's also super easy to sell financials of doing MORE vs doing less. Doing 4 formulaic movies a year that all clear $150 million in profit sounds a lot better than doing 1 really great movie that clears $500 million, I'm sure.
But this is Marvel. The MCU over the last 15 years or so has become the biggest media property in the world. They took that huge risk multiple times and it paid off (Guardians of the Galaxy being the easiest example)…..
Totally agree, but I'd suggest that success breeds more conservatism over time.
Marvel has no heroes left that are showcase talents. Disney may continue to bathe in the revenue but to most, the universe has jumped the shark.
MaroonStain said:
Marvel has no heroes left that are showcase talents. Disney may continue to bathe in the revenue but to most, the universe has jumped the shark.
X-Men and even Fantastic 4 can be huge within the MCU.
We all forget that Iron Man was NOT a hugely popular character in marvel before that movie came out.MaroonStain said:
Marvel has no heroes left that are showcase talents. Disney may continue to bathe in the revenue but to most, the universe has jumped the shark.
So there are plenty of heroes left for them to throw around
MaroonStain said:
Marvel has no heroes left that are showcase talents. Disney may continue to bathe in the revenue but to most, the universe has jumped the shark.
Yeah, I don't buy this at all personally. Think of that funeral scene from Endgame. The only characters there that aren't here any more are Captain America and T'Challa. It's not a lineup of spares outside of that.
Even the new additions have been mostly celebrated. The casting is still on point. Ms. Marvel, Moon Knight, She-Hulk, Shang-Chi. Has anyone ever read a complaint about Oscar Isaac's performance?
I think it's more a matter of using them properly. Thor was made dumber, Doctor Strange got sidelined in favor of cameos & Wanda, Wasp got ignored in Quantumania, Hulk is a side character at best… that kind of stuff has got to improve. These are popular characters, who have been here for years, that are getting the short end of the stick.
But in general: Spider-Man, Guardians, still great. Just don't make a Guardians movie that eschews character development and stakes for cameos and future phase setup - otherwise it's just a waste of time.
LOL. It didn't take much...
Seriously, though...Iron Man was a fave of mine when I was a kid. I am probably just past my prime with the newest Marvel beings like those mentioned above.
Iron Man want a huge seller when the movie came out, but he had a lot of history and was an OG Avengers.
X-Men will be a game changer when introduced and should reinvigorate everything if they're the new focus.
X-Men will be a game changer when introduced and should reinvigorate everything if they're the new focus.
If you want some nostalgia, my favorite YouTube reviewer did a look back on Iron Man this past Wednesday and it was an enjoyable episode….
YouTube runtime shows 20 minutes but when you skip the advertisements and intro/ending it's closer to 15
YouTube runtime shows 20 minutes but when you skip the advertisements and intro/ending it's closer to 15
Been saying this for 20 years now. I loved this movie when it came out, and I still love it now. Do I prefer Ruffalo's iteration? Yes, but only because we've spent so much time with him now, and because he's appeared in so many of the best MCU entires. But this movie is so weird, and fun, and gonzo, and takes chances in ways no comic book movie has since. I'm also a big fan of the desert setting, and the incredible desert action sequence through the canon is still one of my favorites in any comic book movie ever. In fact, this make me want to rewatch the whole thing again right now...
I'm late but I *loved* Ang Lee's HULK, a bizarro, green-tinged psychodrama about fathers and sons and actually dramatizes Banner's freudian anger and it's origin. It's also a visual marvel, with more stylistic, comic-book invention than most superhero movies combined. Incredible. pic.twitter.com/TLpuIeM6hn
— Brendan Hodges (@metaplexmovies) February 27, 2023
People drag "mutant poodles" and lime-green CGI, but Lee tried to seriously integrate classic monster-movies (Frankenstein, Jekyll & Hyde), psychoanalaytic drama and comic aesthetics into an ambitious whole, vastly preferable to the flat, flippant irony of most comic-book movies. pic.twitter.com/i4cFNmrF4K
— Brendan Hodges (@metaplexmovies) February 27, 2023
I get that the tweeter is applauding Lee's desire to hit some of those classic literary tropes in that Hulk movie...but it was not good.
