› ›

Marvel Cinematic Universe (2008 - present)

1…4344464849…181

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited July 2016 Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    In the end they are cannibalizing themselves because there are distinct similarities (at least conceptually) between the two universes even though most prefer Marvel, who has definitely executed better to date.

    I think the more unique and less known characters (to the general audience) like Deadpool, GoG and Suicide Squad stand a chance of surprising on the upside going forward, while the more popular ones and certainly the large ensemble efforts could be less successful than expected (although still make bucketloads of money).

    The Marvel ensemble films are the ones that always reach into the billions (Avengers, Avengers 2, CA: Civil War), while I think DC will have a hard time getting there right out of the gate like Marvel did with The Avengers.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2016 Posts: 23,883
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    In the end they are cannibalizing themselves because there are distinct similarities (at least conceptually) between the two universes even though most prefer Marvel, who has definitely executed better to date.

    I think the more unique and less known characters (to the general audience) like Deadpool, GoG and Suicide Squad stand a chance of surprising on the upside going forward, while the more popular ones and certainly the large ensemble efforts could be less successful than expected (although still make bucketloads of money).

    The Marvel ensemble films are the ones that always reach into the billions (Avengers, Avengers 2, CA: Civil War), while I think DC will have a hard time getting there right out of the gate like Marvel did with The Avengers.
    Yes, but the box office has been declining with each successive ensemble piece, despite increasing ticket prices in the intervening years (Avengers was $1.52bn, Ultron was $1.41bn and CW was $1.15bn despite, for all intents and purposes, being an Avengers type film). That is my point. Marvel had the advantage of being a 'first mover' and established the character iterations earlier, but there is a risk of 'overload' with the ensembles.

    I think the more off beat releases have more of a chance of critical and box office surprise against expectations going forward. SS is an example.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @bondjames, I see what you mean. And because DC have come second, their ensembles will feel like more of a retread of what Marvel has done, with the same basic layout:

    Introduce team, create chemistry in team, introduce villain, create conflict between team and villain/s, then a final Act 3 battle where everything in one area gets destroyed, before the heroes save the day.

    You may also be right about the more original or "fresh" films garnering more bucks at the BO simply because they haven't been done to death yet across the genre. And if SS has any chance, it's that: Marvel doesn't have an all villains ensemble movie under their belt, and audiences haven't seen this kind of film before in the genre or to such a blockbuster level.

    If Sony ever use Tom Holland's Spidey in a Sinister Six film, I can predict the moaning now. "What? But DC alreeeeeeady did thiiiiiiiiis."
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Yes, that's what I'm getting @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7. Also, I think these ensemble pieces tend to have too many characters in them & don't give enough time to development of each persona. So they come off as 'store fronts' & glorified fight fests. Ultron for example was a very interesting character, but I felt he wasn't explored enough in AoU.

    Sure, that risk exists with SS as well, but as you noted, it's something different, being a 'villain' piece.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @bondjames, that first part of your post is why I worry for the future DC ensembles. We haven't gotten to know Flash, Cyborg or any of the other characters mentioned before, so when we see them for the first time in JL, I worry they won't get the time they need to develop properly, and they'll be blank slate cardboard cut outs until the solos.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Agent007391 wrote: »
    I don't think it was ever two movies, I just think they were two separate movies that when connected tell one story.

    Yes. Infinity War is the first film and the second will be infinity *whatever*

    Both films as you rightly said are 2 separate whole films that tell one story. The tricky part is, filming starts in 3 months and both films will be filmed simultaneously.
  • Master_DaharkMaster_Dahark
    Posts: 4,813
    I may be a bit behind, but are they still doing two movies on the subject?
    Couldn't the first one be 'Infinity Gauntlet' and then 'Infinity WAR'?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    edited July 2016 Posts: 11,139
    Yes they are doing 2 movies.

    The first one has been confirmed to be Infinity War.


    For some time, Marvel Studios has hinted that their two-part Avengers: Infinity War will be getting new titles. Today, there’s a minor update as Walt Disney Pictures confirms that the first film will retain the Avengers: Infinity War title and that the second is now officially known as an Untitled Avengers film.


    http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/751215-avengers-infinity-war-title-update#1qbebS2tukjzeVd5.99
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    doubleoego wrote: »
    Agent007391 wrote: »
    I don't think it was ever two movies, I just think they were two separate movies that when connected tell one story.

    Yes. Infinity War is the first film and the second will be infinity *whatever*

    Both films as you rightly said are 2 separate whole films that tell one story. The tricky part is, filming starts in 3 months and both films will be filmed simultaneously.

    Filming them simultaneously works best for the actors' availability. They know where they're going, as far as the universe is going, so filming them together just gets most of the heavy work done while the actors can film.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,504
    I thought 'Infinity War' wasn't shooting until 2017? If it's filming in three months, then I'm bummed because Ritchie wanted to get the gang back together to do 'Sherlock Holmes 3' by the end of the year, because he knew Downey Jr. would be busy for a while filming the 'Avengers' movies. Shame.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Master_Dahark wrote: »
    I may be a bit behind, but are they still doing two movies on the subject?
    Couldn't the first one be 'Infinity Gauntlet' and then 'Infinity WAR'?
    I think the time hasn´t come yet for a big Hollywood blockbuster to be called Something Gauntlet.

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,692
    Oh, so there is still 2 Avengers films coming, one in 2018 and one in 2019? Good, because I was excited for the show-down between Avengers and Justice League in 2019, as they both have installments released a month apart. Plus the 5th (and final?) Indy film with Harrison Ford and the 3rd and last film of the current Star Wars trilogy. Will be a huge year.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    The new MS logo intro...

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    doubleoego wrote: »
    The new MS logo intro...


    Music does nothing for me, neither does the logo actually.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    I kinda like it, but I miss the old one.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    I didn’t care for it, to be honest. I'm not sure why they felt the need to change it.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    I think it's better than what's come before and as for the change, there are many people who can't tell the difference between MS production films from Marvel characters made at other studios, like the F4 and X-men movies. This new logo intro definitively helps provide a distinction.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Isn t that just for the comic-con?
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Nope. It's the new intro logo going forward which will start with Dr.Strange.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    All right.Thanks. I can live with that.
  • SanchairsSanchairs UK
    Posts: 140
    RC7 wrote: »
    doubleoego wrote: »
    The new MS logo intro...


    Music does nothing for me, neither does the logo actually.


    I still like his Winter Soldier Stealth outfit, Marvel's best film to date.
  • DRush76DRush76
    edited August 2016 Posts: 533
    For the past year or two, the MCU films have been a mixed bag for me. I liked some of them and loved at least three of them.

    I liked "IRON MAN 3", but was not that impressed by the villain's goal or the film's finale. And Tony Stark was becoming a bit of an annoyance. I loved both "CAPTAIN AMERICA 2" and "GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY". I liked "AGE OF ULTRON". But I had some problems with the plot and disliked the Sokovia finale. I really enjoyed "ANT-MAN". However, "CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR" proved to be another disappointment for me. I couldn't tell whether this was a Captain America, Iron Man or Avengers film. This is confusing, considering that it was supposed to be a Captain America solo movie. And I had some problems with the plot.

    @bondjames, that first part of your post is why I worry for the future DC ensembles. We haven't gotten to know Flash, Cyborg or any of the other characters mentioned before, so when we see them for the first time in JL, I worry they won't get the time they need to develop properly, and they'll be blank slate cardboard cut outs until the solos.


    Marvel just pulled the same stunt with Black Panther and Spider-Man in "CAPTAIN AMERICA 3". Neither War Machine, Hawkeye, Black Widow, the Falcon, the Maximoff twins or Vision have ever received any real solo flicks. So, why are you ONLY worrying about the DC ensembles?
  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,827
    That's because, historically, the Marvel characters you're talking about (with the exception of Spider-Man, who has already a TV series and five movies) didn't begin with their own titles, while the DC characters appearing in Justice League (with the exception of Cyborg) all had their own titles before joining the team, that's why.
  • DRush76DRush76
    Posts: 533
    That doesn't sound like a good excuse to me. Black Panther didn't have his own title? And you gave an exception for Spider-man's appearance in "CAPTAIN AMERICA 3"? This sounds like you're splitting hairs to me.

    Frankly, I see no need for this ridiculous need that we have to choose between the D.C. Comics movies and the Marvel movies. Or that we have to judge one group superior to the other. It's ridiculous. No matter how much money any of these films earn at the box office, it is not a final word on how good each film is. Film criticism is subjective. And the idea that majority rules doesn't really matter, either. Whatever movie that really appeals to me - whether it's DC Comics, Marvel or some other comic book line - I am going to buy a DVD copy of it, so that I can watch it as many times as I like. And no movie critic or majority opinion is going to sway me.
  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,827
    Black Panther had his own title, but he first appeared in an arc in Fantastic Four. The Black Widow (and Hawkman) were first villains in Iron Man, IIRC. The Maximov Twins ? Members of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants (in X-Men) before appearing in Avengers. The Falcon ? Captain America's sidekick. War Machine ? Iron Man's sidekick. And Vision appeared first in Avengers. Only Spider-Man had his own title, and has appeared in multiple media (cartoons, TV series and movies) before appearing in Civil War. So no, I'm not splitting hairs here. Just mentioning that the fact that they all appeared first in an ensemble movie is a reflection of them appearing first in a comicbook not of their own. Which is not the case for Flash, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern (but is the case for Cyborg). If DC wanted to do things right, they should have made those characters appear in their own movie first, before having them join in Justice League, just ike Marvel did for Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and Captain America.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    13913739_1441541199195781_145385401801325516_o.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoibCJ9

    Brie doing some background research.
  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,827
    Meanwhile :

    radiotimes.com/news/2016-08-09/tom-hiddleston-just-shared-the-first-glimpse-of-loki-in-thor-ragnarok

  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,827
    And during the Olympics :

  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    http://screenrant.com/agent-carter-revival-marvel-jeph-loeb/?utm_source=SR-FB-P&utm_medium=Social-Distribution&utm_campaign=SR-FB-P&view=list

    agent-carter1.jpg

    Agent Carter: Marvel TV Head Hopes To See Revival... I hope this happens I quite liked the show.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I don't know why Agent Carter wasn't another Netflix exclusive from jump for Marvel. It would do great on there.
Sign In or Register to comment.