NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
Whether or not they succeed that's kind of the point though. Disney is selling to a global market place so when they have the white guy market cornered with Stark/Rogers/Thor/Parker/etc, so they try to seek growth in other markets. Which is why Brie Larson's Captain Marvel is a character that maybe little girls will look up to (again whether or not that works is beside the point), and not some big boobed blond in spandex and high heels.
This is a topic though that 'gamers' started getting pissy about some years back and it's expanded into other geek culture. And of course with social media & youtube you have a whole content creator model that earn their living peddling this nonsense.
I don't have an issue with them branching out into different segments - my issue is that when these films aren't as financially successful, everyone takes it personally.
Maybe expect niche financial results for a niche demographic, unless they come out and support it in droves.
It’s like the posters that are constantly surprised and outraged at hockey’s relatively insignificant stature among the US sports landscape.
Back to the original point, it just irks me when a flawed or mediocre film doesn't perform well, the fingers are automatically pointed towards toxicity and not the fact that maybe the film wasn't very good.
The same thing happened with The Last Jedi.
In this case, it seems to be a charming if by-the-numbers entry into the Marvel landscape and I would chalk it up to oversaturation and a lack of connectivity between the characters and the audience.
Disney didn't seem to have much faith in the movie given how many times they pushed back the release date and did re-shoots. Also, no toy line which is pretty telling.
I remember when people were predicting doom and gloom for the Super Mario Brothers movie because critics hated it.
I predicted a massive windfall and of course I was proven right.
It's a film aimed at children and families (including parents of multiple generations who played the games) and it hit that segment like a bulls-eye.
The fact that a certain critic or two thought that it was "inane" and "missed an opportunity to tell a larger and more nuanced story" just goes to show how out of touch they are sometimes with the movie-watching populace.
Captain Marvel is not one of the more popular heroes in the Marvel canon, so I'm not sure why people were expecting the character to be widely accepted. The film itself was pretty standard origin story fare, with nothing that really distinguished it from any other MCU film aside from having a female protagonist.
The only reason GotG worked was because of the James Gunn approach which embraced humour and overall silliness. It had nothing specifically to do with the characters themselves IMO.
Thor: Ragnarok did a 180 in terms of style from the previous two Thor films and unsurprisingly is regarded as much better than the previous ones which were pretty generic.
Loki and Wanda Vision probably attracted the most buzz of anything in the past few years and unsurprisingly they were the most original products of the MCU.
The same again applies to Andor in the SW universe.
Last edited: