Disney thinks they are too big to fail!

[Marvelgirl]

That just seems super hypocritical to me. Like you can trash what one side likes but the other side isn't allowed to trash what you like, and then you expect the other side must like what you like as well.

It's dangerous to think that everything must cater to your tastes and be made to your specifics or else it's a faulty product, but that's part and parcel for the original post in this thread, too.

He said Thor Ragnarok was a good thor film because the story was not iconic enough to be serious. Can you help me try and understand his POV? . If he wants a bad batman film, batman and robin is the best. thor ragnarok and batman and robin have the same tone and poor film direction process. I think both batman and robin and thor ragnarok are the worst batman and thor movies.

That makes no sense.


Rating has got nothing to do with depth.



Up, Inside Out, WALL-E, the Toy Story movies, the Incredibles movies, to name a few. So, I find your argument vague and unconvincing.

(FIY: and I've yet to hear a convincing argument that Guardians 2 lacked depth. Logan violence and language wasn't what made it a deep movie; the way it explored the characters was. On top of that, Disney has given us stuff like Zootopia and Star Wars: The Last Jedi.)

The more story content you let in your movies, the more depth your movies has. Marvel is not thought provoking or serious enough. This was not it when X-Men 1 opened in Auschwitz camps. People are still shocked, asking if it was a ‘‘comic book movie’’. More shocked now more than ever since the movie looks so different to the CBM we have now. Cinematic movies feel like jokes.

SM2 is very much on the level of stuff we get from Disney overall

SM2 is not like something from Disney. Sam Raimi would have been very frustrated with Disney as many others have. I am sure, he will want to direct his own effects and will not settle for a studio telling him they will take care of things. SM2 is on the level of Into the Spiderverse. SM2 Peter is an adult and ready for holy matrimony. Ready to take on the responsibility of Spiderman alone. When Homecoming Spiderman's stop being an Iron man universe's experiment or stop obsessively trying to stress the notion, Spiderman is like a child star. We can have a conversation.

You remind me of another poster who used to hang out here. He or she was obsessed with the idea that high ratings and lack of humor equaled depth. While I haven't seen everything on your list there, I submit for your your consideration Pixar. They've worked with Disney their entire career, have never made a movie rated above PG (and many of those did't even deserve that), and usually have a sense of humor about them. That said, they consistently put out movies with a great deal of depth and complexity, usually exceeding that of the superhero genre's standard offerings.

Do I remind you for a poster or do I remind you for many good screen writers or non-cinematic universe fans? We come in the millions. Non cinematic movies (the good ones) could never survive without a deeper content or a compelling drama that will hold up without CGI aspect of comic films. MCU movies can survive on just spoofed out jokes and a lot of CGI wasted on nothing.

[Jokerz79]

He said Thor Ragnarok was a good thor film because the story was not iconic enough to be serious. Can you help me try and understand his POV? . If he wants a bad batman film, batman and robin is the best. thor ragnarok and batman and robin have the same tone and poor film direction process. I think both batman and robin and thor ragnarok are the worst batman and thor movies.


The more story content you let in your movies, the more depth your movies has. Marvel is not thought provoking or serious enough. This was not it when X-Men 1 opened in Auschwitz camps. People are still shocked, asking if it was a ‘‘comic book movie’’. More shocked now more than ever since the movie looks so different to the CBM we have now. Cinematic movies feel like jokes.



SM2 is not like something from Disney. Sam Raimi would have been very frustrated with Disney as many others have. I am sure, he will want to direct his own effects and will not settle for a studio telling him they will take care of things. SM2 is on the level of Into the Spiderverse. SM2 Peter is an adult and ready for holy matrimony. Ready to take on the responsibility of Spiderman alone. When Homecoming Spiderman's stop being an Iron man universe's experiment or stop obsessively trying to stress the notion, Spiderman is like a child star. We can have a conversation.





Do I remind you for a poster or do I remind you for many good screen writers or non-cinematic universe fans? We come in the millions. Non cinematic movies (the good ones) could never survive without a deeper content or a compelling drama that will hold up without CGI aspect of comic films. MCU movies can survive on just spoofed out jokes and a lot of CGI wasted on nothing.

You do realize Raimi's last film was a Disney movie right?

[SuperiorIronman]

He said Thor Ragnarok was a good thor film because the story was not iconic enough to be serious. Can you help me try and understand his POV? . If he wants a bad batman film, batman and robin is the best. thor ragnarok and batman and robin have the same tone and poor film direction process. I think both batman and robin and thor ragnarok are the worst batman and thor movies.


The more story content you let in your movies, the more depth your movies has. Marvel is not thought provoking or serious enough. This was not it when X-Men 1 opened in Auschwitz camps. People are still shocked, asking if it was a ‘‘comic book movie’’. More shocked now more than ever since the movie looks so different to the CBM we have now. Cinematic movies feel like jokes.

X-men is not just good because it opens in Auschwitz. The 90's Captain America movie opens with a young boy getting kidnapped by Nazi's to forcibly become Redskull to the tune of sad piano music. Most people have no idea that one let alone two of these Cap movies pre-dates the MCU. Just adding a real-world tragedy or event (like Hitler's fascination with the occult and super-soldiers) to a movie does not make it deep, good, or fascinating. Depth is the layers of film being pulled away to find meaning in a scene or film as a whole intentional or not. Depth does not make a film good but it does allow a film to be examined on a level disconnected from its entertainment value. But there is nothing wrong with just having entertainment.

X-men opening in Auschwitz carries the thematic meaning of persecution of a minority, it explains why Magneto is radicalized, and it adds layers to the world because it shows mutants have been a presence long before the beginnings of the story in the modern day. Does that automatically make a film good? No, a film being worthwhile is the sum of its parts. If all you needed was the opening, you wouldn't need the rest of the movie.

Shock is also not an indicator of a film being good because I could make a horror movie where a pregnant woman is having a picnic with her husband on a beach and a sea monster just comes out and eats them both without warning. You'd be shocked that happened but what does that do for you?

A film is the sum of its parts and just saying that a film not having much depth automatically makes it bad or not worth your time is bad. Film does not have to be an essay or require a guide to figure out what's happening.

[WebLurker]

I can name a guy who made 20 videos bashing Star Wars LJ. You should see how much he HATED Black Panther (claim that film was going to bomb and put Disney out of business) and now Cap Marvel. He hates it so much he's trying to get a certain group to support his crowd funding books to counter Ms Marvel and every female lead book at Marvel. On the day Cap Marvel comes out.
Oh here is the NUGGET about him-he has NOT seen Star Wars Last Jedi (he bashed that film bash on trailers ONLY) and has not bought a Marvel book for 21 years. He bashes Marvel because of certain youtubers and parrots what they say with even nastier commentary.

And he parrots the look at the toys collecting dust on the shelves narrative. ESPECIALLY anything toy line with females-see DC Super Hero Girls, WWE Divas, Marvel Rising & Star Wars.

I've seen more then a few YouTubers who've done those kinds of things. Captain Marvel, specifically, seems to have quite the devoted hate following as well, for some reason.

How is it a SJW thing when you are dealing with 40+ years? Yes you will see some toys collect DUST-why? Because you keep making the same set of folks-sooner than later no one will want them. It happens with every toy line.
The toys that sell out are the ones that are FEW in number. And especially if they are POC.

I go toy hunting.

You could NOT find a Donald Glover Lando figure in stores in my city until 2 weeks before Christmas. Duke Thomas could NOT stay on the shelves here. Finn figures are still hard to find. Same with Vixen, Jessica Cruz, New Day, Shelton Benjamin and Black Panther movie toys. Marvel Rising Patriot? No store had him in stock online or offline. I had a battle trying to get one from Target. Killmonger toys with Michael B Jordan's face-lets no even talk about him. That was another fight.

Lets not forget what some stores do with toys. I have seen store A put out the toys at the expect price. While store B threw them on CLEARANCE the moment they arrived. I saw that with DC toys. Especially Wonder Woman, Justice League and Batman. So if I live near that store-I am going there for the clearance.

Also remember Toy R Us kept getting new toys as they were going out of business. Right as Avengers End Game, Incredibles 2 & Antman 2 were coming out. Funny this is even at 90% off no one wanted the WWE Divas or Dc Super Hero Girls. Everything Star Wars & Marvel sold out.

Yeah, I don't think the armchair critics understand how markets work. (Wish stores around here were carrying those Jessica Cruz figures.)

[Powerboy]

I've seen more then a few YouTubers who've done those kinds of things. Captain Marvel, specifically, seems to have quite the devoted hate following as well, for some reason.

Yeah, I don't think the armchair critics understand how markets work. (Wish stores around here were carrying those Jessica Cruz figures.)

I strongly suspect that most armchair critics don't understand the process of movie-making at all. I get that you were talking about the merchandising but still.

I saw a post criticizing that the characters in the Marvel movies are not exactly the characters they were in the original comics or even more recent ones. It reminded me of a joke a friend of mine posted on Facebook.

Answer: I realize that decades have gone by and that our culture has drastically changed AND that film is a different medium from comics. Hence, I understand that the beloved characters of my childhood are being presented in ways significantly different than their original presentation in the comic books of my youth- and I'm okay with that.

Question: What is something that you will almost never hear anyone say on social media?

[Jeramas]

The Toys arent selling because Toys in general arent selling. Digital is killing them adding into the fact is that TLJ didnt offer much new stuff beyond characters in different clothes.

TLJ character assassination of Luke skywalker was new stuff.

BB8 was a smash hit in sales. Disney cared more about that toy than the movie. I knew many parents were getting duped. All forced to buy $250 dollars toys for their kids.

[Marvelgirl]

X-men is not just good because it opens in Auschwitz. The 90's Captain America movie opens with a young boy getting kidnapped by Nazi's to forcibly become Redskull to the tune of sad piano music. Most people have no idea that one let alone two of these Cap movies pre-dates the MCU. Just adding a real-world tragedy or event (like Hitler's fascination with the occult and super-soldiers) to a movie does not make it deep, good, or fascinating. Depth is the layers of film being pulled away to find meaning in a scene or film as a whole intentional or not. Depth does not make a film good but it does allow a film to be examined on a level disconnected from its entertainment value. But there is nothing wrong with just having entertainment.

X-men opening in Auschwitz carries the thematic meaning of persecution of a minority, it explains why Magneto is radicalized, and it adds layers to the world because it shows mutants have been a presence long before the beginnings of the story in the modern day. Does that automatically make a film good? No, a film being worthwhile is the sum of its parts. If all you needed was the opening, you wouldn't need the rest of the movie.

Shock is also not an indicator of a film being good because I could make a horror movie where a pregnant woman is having a picnic with her husband on a beach and a sea monster just comes out and eats them both without warning. You'd be shocked that happened but what does that do for you?

A film is the sum of its parts and just saying that a film not having much depth automatically makes it bad or not worth your time is bad. Film does not have to be an essay or require a guide to figure out what's happening.

I never saw the first Captain America film of the early 90s, if you watch the first film in 2010 the movie spends more time building the hype of avengers and nick fury finding steve. there is little depth in the film. I am on your side with the definition of depth, that is how I define depth. depth is layered. the layerness comes from the additional content. If I have written what you said in details, I would have taken this thread out of track. Keeping it as the opening scene alone was a tip of the iceberg. First Class was the iceberg. non cinematic Disney comic movies don't understands depth and story telling. they fill in the gap with more crossovers-cinematic content. If both of us approached X-Men 1 to Disney, Disney would have told us no, the movie was not for them though they will tell us a 8 part mini series on Netflix will be good.

I strongly suspect that most armchair critics don't understand the process of movie-making at all.

Most of them do, they don't understand it when its Disney movies.

[jetengine]

Most of them do, they don't understand it when its Disney movies.

What is it with you guys and conspiracy theories? Would X-men movie fans hate the DCEU with such fervour if it was no1?

[Cyke]

if you watch the first film in 2010 the movie spends more time building the hype of avengers and nick fury finding steve. there is little depth in the film.

Nick Fury was in the movie for all of 30 seconds (if that). That doesn't seem to be a crucial point to the film's arc.

Plus, I can't really say there was much foreshadowing either in Cap waking up in modern day or the search for Steve, simply because everybody knew that Cap would have to get to the present eventually. The same reason why more recent Spidey and Batman movies don't need to dwell on the origin stories that much these days (even Lego Batman!).

[WebLurker]

Missed this earlier

The more story content you let in your movies, the more depth your movies has. Marvel is not thought provoking or serious enough. This was not it when X-Men 1 opened in Auschwitz camps. People are still shocked, asking if it was a ‘‘comic book movie’’. More shocked now more than ever since the movie looks so different to the CBM we have now. Cinematic movies feel like jokes.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

SM2 is not like something from Disney. Sam Raimi would have been very frustrated with Disney as many others have. I am sure, he will want to direct his own effects and will not settle for a studio telling him they will take care of things. SM2 is on the level of Into the Spiderverse. SM2 Peter is an adult and ready for holy matrimony. Ready to take on the responsibility of Spiderman alone. When Homecoming Spiderman's stop being an Iron man universe's experiment or stop obsessively trying to stress the notion, Spiderman is like a child star. We can have a conversation.

Character-centric, good balance of humor and drama, good grasp of the character, unashamed of its pulpy roots; that's exactly what the MCU is.

Do I remind you for a poster or do I remind you for many good screen writers or non-cinematic universe fans? We come in the millions. Non cinematic movies (the good ones) could never survive without a deeper content or a compelling drama that will hold up without CGI aspect of comic films. MCU movies can survive on just spoofed out jokes and a lot of CGI wasted on nothing.

You remind me of a specific poster.

[JKtheMac]

Premise- Disney think they are too big to fail.
Reality- No company thinks this, and companies are not really capable of thought. Certainly none of their board members would be so inexperienced to believe this. On the other hand they have such a huge accumulation of IP that even if they loose their dominant position they will always be able to make a huge amount of money with licences.

Premise- The MCU is somehow insubstantial or not serious.
Reality- Movies are incredibly risky to make. Huge amounts of money, time, effort and talent go into every movie that receives a general release. The aim is ALWAYS for the movie to find an audience. There is no other reason to make a movie, regardless of criticism. The MCU has a huge audience. It makes a phenomenal amount of money, but it also builds the IP and increases brand awareness. Critics and audiences alike are impressed with them. I just don’t see any way Marvel or Disney can be credibly criticised on any level that matters.

[80sbaby]

Nick Fury was in the movie for all of 30 seconds (if that). That doesn't seem to be a crucial point to the film's arc.

Plus, I can't really say there was much foreshadowing either in Cap waking up in modern day or the search for Steve, simply because everybody knew that Cap would have to get to the present eventually. The same reason why more recent Spidey and Batman movies don't need to dwell on the origin stories that much these days (even Lego Batman!).

Based on his/her comment, I don't think they actually watched the film.

[Marvelgirl]

Missed this earlier



You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

.

Already had someone explain what depth is. Didn’t want to do that on this thread. Have you understood the difference between into the spidervese and the Disney films? It relates to Disney and their failure that they passed on the people from that project. Disney is so into the money, Disney can't see when a unique things comes along to develop. (into the spiderverse).

Character-centric, good balance of humor and drama, good grasp of the character, unashamed of its pulpy roots; that's exactly what the MCU is.

It went over the top after Iron Man 2 and Age of Ultron. How much drama is used for Thor Ragnarok? The drama expectancy of Ragnarok should be one that is off TDK or X2. Anything below that is generically bad, unless this is when you choose not to stack Disney films against another film. TDK/X2 Disney will never green-lit those movies. why did they green-lit a movie called Ragnarok?

You remind me of a specific poster.

Did you hear of the numerous stories of Joss Whedon, Drew Goddard, Jon Favreau , Louis Leterrier, Ava DuVernay, Patty Jenkins , Alan Taylor and Edgar Wright about how Disney ruins things. It is a common knowledge in the world of movies that hardly anyone takes Disney seriously at least in their life-action movies.

[Marvelgirl]

What is it with you guys and conspiracy theories? Would X-men movie fans hate the DCEU with such fervour if it was no1?

I don't like the DCEU all that much. I hate to see them copying the mcu formula. DCEU should have stuck with man of steel's direction. Having said that, DCEU has the better chance to make things right again for CBMs. DCEU can chase the dream of The Dark Knight again. Disney can't chase X2/SM2, no need to bring up Logan or Into the Spiderverse.

[Midvillian1322]

I don't like the DCEU all that much. I hate to see them copying the mcu formula. DCEU should have stuck with man of steel's direction. Having said that, DCEU has the better chance to make things right again for CBMs. DCEU can chase the dream of The Dark Knight again. Disney can't chase X2/SM2, no need to bring up Logan or Into the Spiderverse.

John Favrou works exclusively for Disney. Jungle book/Lion king/Star wars TV show. Still acting in the MCU in movies he doesnt have to. And hes a producer on all the Avengers movies. Clearly John Favrou loves Disney because that's all he works with.