Movies: Marvel Cinematic Universe Discussion - Part 4

[beowulf]

I'm not sure there ever was a formula.

They made movies about superheroes from 2008 to 2012 and kept the door open to making more: the first Avenger movie tied up everything that had been set up, the MCU could have ended there because they made it so that it could be (Thanos post credits was keeping the door open).

The Infinity Stones saga was a huge hit so then Disney behaved like there was a formula but what they did was "set things up and go from there" not "lets plan everything from the start every 10 years".

This isn't super hero fatigue, it is huge brand fatigue.

There was, is(?), a plan they had shown many times how things were planned out 10 years in advance detailing where they wanted to go. Now did they stop following the plan or became complaisant maybe I can see that. The plan also likely got more difficult as they went from the Avengers only to wanting, fans wanting, them to add the Fantastic Four and mutants/X-Men. Maybe they are taking too long to get to those characters but at the same time they wanted enough time between the FOX version of those characters and their new version I guess.

Trying to connect it all is likely one of the biggest issues along with continuing to include smaller characters that are much less known even to comic readers.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

There was, is(?), a plan they had shown many times how things were planned out 10 years in advance detailing where they wanted to go. Now did they stop following the plan or became complaisant maybe I can see that.

Not trying to be pedantic but a plan is not the same thing as a formula.

A plan is "we want to introduce these characters and eventually have them go up against Thanos in a re-telling of a very popular comic story arc".

I think they had a plan and once they basically pulled it off almost perfectly they thought they had a formula. Thing is they made a few duds too (Iron Man 2 and Thor 2) and they also course corrected during it (they basically completely overhauled the character of Thor and decided to not bother with Hulk movies).

The biggest difference with then and now is that a ton of people wanted the MCU to be good, it was a first in terms of big blockbuster movies; now people are just tired.

They really should have planned a down period between the big story arcs but good luck telling shareholders that you will be holding back because you are thinking longterm.

For example, maybe just do TV shows while trying different characters, see who works and where it goes and then launch into the next saga. Quality over quantity is good but if you expect people to get onboard and commit, you have to manage how much you feed them.

 

[StreetHawk]

Not trying to be pedantic but a plan is not the same thing as a formula.

A plan is "we want to introduce these characters and eventually have them go up against Thanos in a re-telling of a very popular comic story arc".

I think they had a plan and once they basically pulled it off almost perfectly they thought they had a formula. Thing is they made a few duds too (Iron Man 2 and Thor 2) and they also course corrected during it (they basically completely overhauled the character of Thor and decided to not bother with Hulk movies).

The biggest difference with then and now is that a ton of people wanted the MCU to be good, it was a first in terms of big blockbuster movies; now people are just tired.

They really should have planned a down period between the big story arcs but good luck telling shareholders that you will be holding back because you are thinking longterm.

For example, maybe just do TV shows while trying different characters, see who works and where it goes and then launch into the next saga. Quality over quantity is good but if you expect people to get onboard and commit, you have to manage how much you feed them.

TV is good for non super powered characters. Keeps more of the FX budgets in check.

MCU now, the actors who played the key roles have moved on, as they should after around a decade in the roles. An Avengers without Ironman, Cap, Thor, etc. doesn't seem right. As would a JL without Sups, Bats, WW, Flash, etc.

 

[RandV]

Wouldn't the risk be that it all look like the DC "no plan" way? Anyway, don't care at all about any of this. People are happy that the film flops? Ok, at least someone's happy. I'd prefer it to be good, because I'll eventually watch it anyway, but I don't mind crap either.
I never thought I'd see the time where nerds would want less of their stuff. Comics were never a problem, nobody read the whole thing and everybody had fun. Now it's like "stop making content, it's too much for ME", or "this one is not for ME, it's all going to shit now".

This is something I occasionally like to point out. Quality aside, just seems weird that Disney can try to put out 1 Star Wars movie a year and Star Wars fans will go 'no please that's too much Star Wars!'

But I also have to recognize that I'm someone who like reading big epic fantasy/sci-fi series, a 2-3 hour movie seems minuscule when I can churn through millions of words and ask for more. And I think what it comes down to is a downward spiral where enthusiasts drive interest, the more casual audience comes in and drives billion $$$ box office draws, corporate execs want even more money so push more of the same out, casual audience gets overwhelmed and starts dropping out.

I think it comes down to not being too much of one thing but too many things people are asked to 'keep up' with. For the big screen most people probably only go to a few movies a year/set a certain amount of time towards these activities, and the general audience for a good period was okay with doing a couple Marvel movies a year. But then you start cramming the cinema with 'nerd culture' stuff, and in this case create a bunch of additional TV series you have to follow too, and people start dropping out.

Especially on the TV end. Now you're moving into the crowded living room where there's so many streaming services and TV shows to watch, and it shouldn't be a surprise that a lot of your prior movie goers don't have a desire to keep up with a steady stream of Marvel content.

 

[RandV]

Not trying to be pedantic but a plan is not the same thing as a formula.

A plan is "we want to introduce these characters and eventually have them go up against Thanos in a re-telling of a very popular comic story arc".

I think they had a plan and once they basically pulled it off almost perfectly they thought they had a formula. Thing is they made a few duds too (Iron Man 2 and Thor 2) and they also course corrected during it (they basically completely overhauled the character of Thor and decided to not bother with Hulk movies).

I think objectively from a story perspective Thanos just worked really well for the format. There were 5 MacGuffin's you could spread out through different movies, and a big bad end boss trying to collect them all. Simple, straight forward, and easy to keep up with.

There are other story elements in that phase of the MCU like the Sokovia Accords coming out of Avengers 2, and more important for the post-Thanos phase but the 'snap' and the 5 year gap that makes such a huge story element... and I'm assuming these things are forgotten and go right over most peoples heads when they sit down for a new Marvel movie. The build up to Thanos though? That's easy.

Which comes around to the new MCU phase, the concept of a 'multiverse' and 'timelines' have always been a big part of the comics but I think it's a terrible angle to try and bring to the larger audience. It can too easily turn things into a big confusing mess and really nails down the 'nothing actually matters' angle when you can just bring whatever character you killed off back.

 

[PeteWorrell]

This is something I occasionally like to point out. Quality aside, just seems weird that Disney can try to put out 1 Star Wars movie a year and Star Wars fans will go 'no please that's too much Star Wars!'

But I also have to recognize that I'm someone who like reading big epic fantasy/sci-fi series, a 2-3 hour movie seems minuscule when I can churn through millions of words and ask for more. And I think what it comes down to is a downward spiral where enthusiasts drive interest, the more casual audience comes in and drives billion $$$ box office draws, corporate execs want even more money so push more of the same out, casual audience gets overwhelmed and starts dropping out.

I think it comes down to not being too much of one thing but too many things people are asked to 'keep up' with. For the big screen most people probably only go to a few movies a year/set a certain amount of time towards these activities, and the general audience for a good period was okay with doing a couple Marvel movies a year. But then you start cramming the cinema with 'nerd culture' stuff, and in this case create a bunch of additional TV series you have to follow too, and people start dropping out.

Especially on the TV end. Now you're moving into the crowded living room where there's so many streaming services and TV shows to watch, and it shouldn't be a surprise that a lot of your prior movie goers don't have a desire to keep up with a steady stream of Marvel content.

Disney did not endear themselves to the fans from the start by completely rejecting the expanded universe that a lot of people loved and embraced for decades. It's even worse when most of the content that Disney has created since then, has been pretty lackluster like rehashing old content or making uninspired prequels.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Which comes around to the new MCU phase, the concept of a 'multiverse' and 'timelines' have always been a big part of the comics but I think it's a terrible angle to try and bring to the larger audience. It can too easily turn things into a big confusing mess and really nails down the 'nothing actually matters' angle when you can just bring whatever character you killed off back.

This is an excellent point. That entire angle is aimed to please the most hard-core fans. It's a potential turn off to casuals and a barrier of entry to anyone completely new. This ties back to my previous post about hubris ... the assumption that since you've won big you're going to keep winning big and the fans are going to follow regardless. I think they overestimated how much of all that big box office was coming from folks who are more fickle than they thought.

 

[Roo Returns]

This is an excellent point. That entire angle is aimed to please the most hard-core fans. It's a potential turn off to casuals and a barrier of entry to anyone completely new. This ties back to my previous post about hubris ... the assumption that since you've won big you're going to keep winning big and the fans are going to follow regardless. I think they overestimated how much of all that big box office was coming from folks who are more fickle than they thought.

Marvel's big stars are the ones from 1963-1993. Those are the most known characters: It's Spider-Man, Hulk, Captain America, X-Men, Fantastic Four. That is the core, that is who they should be doing 90% of the movies on. The other 10% can be spinoffs or the second tier characters like Ghost Rider, She-Hulk, Daredevil, etc.

Blade worked because Wesley Snipes was still a huge star in that era and it had a tight script during a period of crappy and bloated movies.

The issue with the Marvels is during the aforementioned era especially the Jim Shooter years, Rogue had taken Carol Danvers' powers, and Monica was Captain Marvel/leader of The Avengers. It's too confusing especially with the Shazam thing.

They can make an awesome X-Men movie and get away with 70% of the team being lesser known characters, but one of Wolverine/Storm/Cyclops is always going to need to be present.

 

[beowulf]

Marvel's big stars are the ones from 1963-1993. Those are the most known characters: It's Spider-Man, Hulk, Captain America, X-Men, Fantastic Four. That is the core, that is who they should be doing 90% of the movies on. The other 10% can be spinoffs or the second tier characters like Ghost Rider, She-Hulk, Daredevil, etc.

Blade worked because Wesley Snipes was still a huge star in that era and it had a tight script during a period of crappy and bloated movies.

The issue with the Marvels is during the aforementioned era especially the Jim Shooter years, Rogue had taken Carol Danvers' powers, and Monica was Captain Marvel/leader of The Avengers. It's too confusing especially with the Shazam thing.

They can make an awesome X-Men movie and get away with 70% of the team being lesser known characters, but one of Wolverine/Storm/Cyclops is always going to need to be present.

You forgot one, he has been the second most recognizable and loved Marvel character for about 3 decades now after Spide-Man....

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I think objectively from a story perspective Thanos just worked really well for the format. There were 5 MacGuffin's you could spread out through different movies, and a big bad end boss trying to collect them all. Simple, straight forward, and easy to keep up with.

There are other story elements in that phase of the MCU like the Sokovia Accords coming out of Avengers 2, and more important for the post-Thanos phase but the 'snap' and the 5 year gap that makes such a huge story element... and I'm assuming these things are forgotten and go right over most peoples heads when they sit down for a new Marvel movie. The build up to Thanos though? That's easy.

Which comes around to the new MCU phase, the concept of a 'multiverse' and 'timelines' have always been a big part of the comics but I think it's a terrible angle to try and bring to the larger audience. It can too easily turn things into a big confusing mess and really nails down the 'nothing actually matters' angle when you can just bring whatever character you killed off back.

They dropped the ball on the post Thanos "big bad guy" IMO, which bleeds into mishandling the multiverse.

Everything was lined up perfectly to make Scarlet Witch the next big bad guy and do a version of the House of M storyline. She had the rage/motivation from the loss of Vision. She is a powerful enough character powers wise to be a threat to groups of heroes. She was an established character you didnt have to ask the audience to learn about lessening the load. Hell, they even made her a bad guy with Wandavision and Dr Strange 2, then just dropped it.

On top of all of that, you could use a version of the "no more mutants" line as the main conflict and have her be the one to open up the multiverse. Then you can intro the F4 and/or X-Men in their own films fighting her in a different universe and ultimately crossing over into the same as the new Avengers and teaming up to defeat her.

 

[Epictetus]

That's a tough ask to take her seriously as the big villain when her and the "Avengers" with Vision couldn't beat Thanos over a bunch of films. Maybe she could have been a transition villain to Kang or whoever is supposed to be the next big threat.

This is not to say Kang is that big villain either. What a disaster.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

That's a tough ask to take her seriously as the big villain when her and the "Avengers" with Vision couldn't beat Thanos over a bunch of films. Maybe she could have been a transition villain to Kang or whoever is supposed to be the next big threat.

This is not to say Kang is that big villain either. What a disaster.

Fair, but they he been steadily increasing her power levels in the movies and showed her as more powerful than Thanos on her own.

At the end of Infinity War she destroyed the mind stone while also holding back Thanos + 5 stones. Then at the end of End Game she alone was tearing Thanos apart. Plus the way she dominated in Strange 2. They could've fairly easily kept ramping up her power level to her comic book level

 

[Bowski]

You forgot one, he has been the second most recognizable and loved Marvel character for about 3 decades now after Spide-Man....
View attachment 770783

He mentioned the X-Men. Even "one of Wolverine/Storm/Cyclops."

Unless you mean his solo comics, which no one ever bothered to purchase.
Japan/Origin/Alpha Flight...who gives a damn?

 

[Roo Returns]

You forgot one, he has been the second most recognizable and loved Marvel character for about 3 decades now after Spide-Man....
View attachment 770783

Yup, part of the X-Verse. Unless they want to do a movie of him vs. Elsie-Dee/Albert.

 

[Roo Returns]

He mentioned the X-Men. Even "one of Wolverine/Storm/Cyclops."

Unless you mean his solo comics, which no one ever bothered to purchase.
Japan/Origin/Alpha Flight...who gives a damn?

Alpha Flight has a following albeit a small and hardcore one. They've borrowed various characters and incorporated them onto the X-Teams mostly in the 2000s-2010s (North Star, Lifeguard, Wild Child, and even now, Daken/Fang/Wolverine's son).

That's the perfect team to use for a 6-10 episode Netflix show once you have an established universe and can tie it in.

And the current Fall of X Alpha Flight miniseries is very interesting.

BTW, it's funny to read how Claremont wrote Wolverine prior to 1982/Frank Miller mini series. He was probably a lot closer to someone like Banshee in terms of use.

 

[RandV]

Talking about Alpha Flight here, but what about Excalibur? Are we going to get Excalibur?

As a child with multiple brothers in the late 80's we had this thing where we'd call dibs/ownership on something whether it be a comic book series or a character in a fighting game and if it wasn't yours you couldn't collect/use it. We all liked X-Men, but my oldest brother called dibs on it so I settled for collecting the 'British X-Men' series Excalibur). Lead by a "Captain Britain" character, at least it had Shadowcat and Nightcrawler, and a 'Phoenix' character who was Scott Summers and Jean Grey's daughter all grown up from the future and for some unexplained reason living in the present.

It's probably pretty crappy overall and doesn't belong in an MCU discussion but what can you do, I have some nostalgia for it and this made me think of it.

 

[Power Man]

Majors found guilty

 

[Primary Assist]

A few industry rags, including the Hollywood Reporter, are reporting that Disney has officially dropped Majors. That decision was clearly not made lightly since they waited all this time for the trial to play out

 

[MMC]

Dumb

 

[Power Man]

Well he is an overrated actor anyway

 

[The Macho King]

Well he is an overrated actor anyway

He was fantastic in Last Black Man in San Francisco.

 

[Power Man]

He was fantastic in Last Black Man in San Francisco.

He was ok at best

 

[Jumptheshark]

We knew he was getting sacked if convicted

 

[Hockey 4 everyone]

Dumb

please explain how this is dumb.

 

[PeteWorrell]

Dumb

Many employers will fire a convicted felon. This is not just Disney being Disney.