Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Marvel Cinematic Universe general stuff

1121122124126127147

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,154 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    2024 is putting the MCU brand on hiatus.

    SW and MCU are very different beasts. There is sense for them to give a bit of a break for SW but not for MCU - too much extra revenue from other sources they're potentially giving up



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,871 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    But am I mistaken but are the movies not bombing in the box office? Are they not losing money on this?

    Antman. Thor and now the marvels all lost money.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,801 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Apparently The Marvels now looks like it won't ever break $100m in the US and will definitely not break $200m worldwide and probably not even close. It cost $275m to make. Wouldn't want to be the person explaining these losses to the board at Disney!



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,154 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Most recent Thor definitely didn't lose money. Antman is debatable. When you take into all the licensing, toys, clothes etc and then selling it onto TV etc those no chance either did.

    Marvels is the first one likely not to make a profit.

    Big thing Marvel can do is just to make cheaper movies. The original Capt Marvel was $152m cost but Marvels ballooned.

    There is no reason to lock up Marvel when there is plenty they can do to make money, even in current down environment. It would be stupid.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,871 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    I really don’t see Antman selling much merch. He’s not a A-List character and his merch wouldn’t be widely known/available like Spider-Man, Captain America and Hulk.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,214 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    Huh, first time I've ever heard merchandising as a defence for a film not losing money. Absolutely a legitimate stream just like home releases are, which is also something brought up almost apologetically after a film's box office run.

    For example I am sure Batman vs Superman produced on both merchandising and home release, yet people still don't care, and still ludicrously call it a bomb.

    I don't think the MCU is dying, but all of a sudden the term soft reboot is being thrown around for Secret Wars. They know things can't continue on as they are in regards to budget for these films (and TV shows) vs return.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Didn't The Rock do something similar lately where he made social media videos telling everyone that Well Actually, Black Adam made a profit when you closed one eye and looked at the numbers a certain way? Vaguely recall people chuckling at his desperation to save face after that wobbled.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,904 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    The MCU isn't dying but these phases are an ill-planned badly thought out mess.

    Post Endgame was going to be bad, but no one expected it to be THIS bad.

    The characters arent there. Thats why people are waiting for X-Men/Fantastic 4. The active characters bar maybe some of the younger ones (Bishop, Kamala, Yelena especially) aren't gunna be part of the future.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,154 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    The question was whether Disney is now losing money on the MCU, not whether the film itself losing money. It is a big difference and comes into play when people are talking about the MCU 'dying' and whether Disney are going to pull the plug on it.

    Disney simply isn't going to let the MCU die even if the movies are making losses, as they look at the bigger picture of toys, licensing, theme parks etc. If they continue to make losses on films with big budgets, they'll just switch to lower budgets and keep pumping them out.

    It is similar conversation as the ridiculous idea that they should have shut down the MCU after End Game - as an artistic endeavour there is a case but it was never, ever going to happen.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,214 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    It's absolutely not dying, I see Phase 4/5 just as a transitional period that they could have handled better, that's all.

    I think they've recognised the mistakes to a degree just in time before introducing FF and X Men. They have to get FF right though. Casting Pedro is a strong indicator they know it has to land.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,214 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    I should have added that I see FF as a key turning point much like Civil War was, as for me that film kicked off the MCU's peak years in terms of quality.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Really, we can't know if it's dying til the MCU is dead; cos when it does we'll have seen the trajectory in its entirety. For now every cough might be the start of decline, or just a cough.

    But if they can't even get a script together for something like Blade, I'm not convinced even they know the answer here, or how to arrest the decline. The rest of Disney's big ticket properties don't suggest a strong hand at the tiller either.

    Agreed on FF; that'll be the acid test here and I don't know. Previous iterations of the property have been ... well, the definition of mixed and the Miles Teller version is a fascinating case study in studio meddling. It's an odd property, speaking even in the context of this MCU, Guardians n all.

    The 2015 flick had the right idea in keeping it small, but it just fell apart in the execution (would be curious to see the original, supposedly more horror inflected version Josh Trank supposedly made).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,904 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Tbf Blade is probably Marvel's weirdest property within their catalogue in the sense that he generally has no business being there.

    He is generally operating by himself against vampires in his own little corner of things. Outside of Blade series vampires have just never really established themselves much, even years ago during "Twilightmania", Jubilee was made a vampire for a few years, and there was an alternate vampire version of Storm for a few months, but vampires as a species have just never really took off in Marvel for whatever reason.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,214 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    Re Blade, I completely agree and I think this is where the lessons have been learned. There's no reason why a Blade film needs to cost more than a 100m.

    On FF, I can't stress enough how huge this film will be for the future of the MCU. They should be taking the money from reduced budgets elsewhere and putting it all on FF, and this is where we disagree. The Fantastic Four are not meant to be grounded like the 2015 film, they are space explorers. The scale should be huge, and the leaks about starting with Galactus does not surprise me. They have to go all out with this film, its critical.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,564 ✭✭✭Slutmonkey57b


    You must be smoking something. They've done how many versions of the fantastic 4 and they've all been box office and critical disasters. More to the point, absolutely nobody who isn't a marvel comics nerd gives a toss about the characters, because they're demonstrably outdated and uninteresting. The whole enterprise is tainted by the previous attempts. You'd have a cinema going audience being presented with "remember that studio that's lost the ability to write decent films? They're doing a reboot of that series that's already failed 3 times. How much money do you fancy wasting on tickets?"



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    They were by no means critical darlings but the first F4 film did make 330 million off of a 100 million budget in 2005 ... so success enough to get a sequel, during post Spider-Man gold rush. So there's potentially an audience if they leaned into the cosmic boisterousness of it all, make them Captain America esque, out of time throwbacks ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,015 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Can't believe Marvel had the audacity to try reboot Captain America after it already failed the previous time.

    (Also applies to the 2003 Hulk film, Spider-Man after the failure of the Andrew Garfield films which also killed their Sinister Six plans, X-Men reboot with First Class after the failure of X-Men 3 and Wolverine Origins, Deadpool after the failure of Wolverine Origins).

    The first two F4 films did okay. They weren't great by any stretch, but they were decent and a bit of fun. The latest reboot was just horrible, and plagued with issues far beyond what ended up on the screen. It was doomed from the start.

    Neither are indicators on how a reboot within the MCU will do. It's not the characters and whether or not people care about them. Nobody "cared" about Iron Man, Cap or Thor in 2006. But Iron Man was done so well, the stinger at the end hinting towards the Avengers raised more interest in Cap and Thor, and then the rest led to the MCU we know.

    If F4 were done well, people could easily care about them again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,214 ✭✭✭The White Wolf


    Fox botching their Fantastic Four films is not a reflection of their popularity, especially in America.

    Edit Just seems a bit mad to me to say the property is a dud when Marvel have built the MCU around secondary characters from their gallery.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,582 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    I have no doubt X-Men will create a bit of a buzz in the MCU if done right, but also worth remembering they have never been Spider-Man / Batman sized megahits film-wise either. They've done perfectly fine, especially given the more modest budget these types of films used to be produced under. But only Days of Future Past and, to a slightly lesser degree, Logan have done really well by modern / MCU standards. Of course, modern standards are demented, but given how big the original Spider-Man trilogy was, for example, X-Men has never been on that level.

    Fan favourites of course, but will be interesting to see if they're any kind of panacea for any wider audience frustration with superhero movies given there's been no shortage of 'em in the past. There's been some seriously **** X-Men movies in the wake of Future Past, too, which won't help.

    That said, X-Men adjacent Deadpool 3 does seem the closest thing they have to a guaranteed hit on the roster at the moment. If that doesn't hit - and I'd be surprised if it doesn't, regardless of quality (a Shawn Levy directed Deadpool film is something I'm personally not going to be going anywhere near!!) - then they'll really be in trouble.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,564 ✭✭✭Slutmonkey57b


    It makes perfect sense because audiences had very few preconceived ideas about the characters before the films came out. At that point, marvel was focused on one thing at a time so characters got a chance to be introduced and there was an element of quality control. Whereas for the 4, people do have preconceived ideas about the characters (they're **** and boring and their films will not be worth going to) and there is no clamouring to bring them back because they've been given multiple introductions and have been shown the door by cinemagoers.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,904 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    2 seasons down.

    I'd completely forgotten just how hilarious pre-framework Fitz was, granted he was still funny after but more as a straight man for Enoch/Deke, but pre-Framework Fitz is priceless.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,904 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Ah no, Mack saying goodbye to Hunter and Bobbi. Thats one of, if not the biggest cut onion moments in the whole MCU. I'd deleted that from my memory.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,015 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Ah yeah, the Spy's Goodbye. Great scene. Really started to solidify Mack as one of my favourite characters.

    Mad to think Hunter and Bobbi were leaving for a potential spin-off...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,109 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    Mack in the framework..... CCCCRRRRYYYYY.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,196 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    Apart from Ming Na, who was already a big name anyway, nobody on Agents of SHIELD has gone on to much, not even Clark Gregg.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,131 ✭✭✭McFly85


    The MCU is something that won’t be finished any time soon but the culmination of the infinity saga and the expansion into Disney+ has made what’s come since a complete mess.

    2/3 films a year that could largely stand by themselves with slight ties to the overarching story with 1 team up worked well as a process.

    With Disney+ it’s really expanded the roster where there’s new incidents, mythologies and heroes being added practically every week - and the integration of these into the main films makes everything more confusing and requires a significantly larger time commitment from the viewer. I don’t expect this strategy to change, I assume Disney want this to get subscriptions to their platform.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,904 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    Yeah actually Mack really went through the blender when ya think about it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,015 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    They've already announced that a lot of the upcoming Disney+ shows will be under a new banner; Marvel Spotlight, which will focus on smaller "street-level" stories and characters with little-to-no integration into the main MCU arc/films. They're not really going to be the level of required viewing that the likes of Wandavision, Falcon & Winter Soldier or Loki have been.

    They're definitely recognising that it's becoming far more of a hindrence than a help, and that a lot of fans are checking out due to the amount of content, so they're dividing it all up a bit.



  • Registered Users Posts: 865 ✭✭✭one armed dwarf


    They won't ever grab the momentum back for this I think tbh. It'll sort of hit a lull and a general plateau and they'll adapt a release strategy around that.

    Reminds me of when an MMO dips after its peak, sometimes people just permanently burn out on a thing. Doesn't matter how much you try to adjust the flow, the films are too similar in their overall narrative structure and style. Once they hit a cadence that doesn't involve just releasing huge bombs into the cinema they'll find a way to make something that appeals to the next generation of cinema goers and doesn't have so much interconnected homework. But they won't see success like they did with the Infinity films for a very long time, if ever imo

    Deadpool will be a hit though because people like those two actors a whole lot. They need to bring that star appeal back in some way



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,582 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    I definitely think there’ll still be occasional hits - things like Deadpool, Spider-Man or other well-known characters will do well. What I’d doubt at this stage is whether the MCU alchemy - where almost anything they release was a megahit - can continue. And that means the big team-up events become less important too, unless they really double down on a handful of big, important characters.

    Ditto with DC - you’ll have Batman and maybe Superman continue to hit most likely, but it’s also a really bad time for them to be betting on them doing a whole reboot with a lot of niche properties and serialised stories. James Gunn has his work cut out for him, to put it mildly.



Advertisement