Is The MCU The Greatest Franchise Of All Time?

[Bunch of Coconuts]

BP did the damn thing, and I'm here for it. But the MCU shouldn't get more than a tiny little whiff of praise for it. They did not support it. They stuck it in a February release instead of a summer blockbuster spot. They killed him off in Infinity, rather than having him be one of the major heroes to save the day (which would add to his fanbase). NO! BP was a hit despite Marvel, not because of it.

You don’t think (American) Black History Month was a good time to release Black Panther?

[CliffHanger2]

Well... your arguement against LOTR being described as "status quo shifting" was to say it was (like most fantasy) white-centric, implying for that reason it wasn't "status quo shifting"... so I think that's not entirely an accurate statement you just made here


BP did the damn thing, and I'm here for it. But the MCU shouldn't get more than a tiny little whiff of praise for it. They did not support it. They stuck it in a February release instead of a summer blockbuster spot. They killed him off in Infinity, rather than having him be one of the major heroes to save the day (which would add to his fanbase). NO! BP was a hit despite Marvel, not because of it.

Well Febuary is black history month lol just saying. Their marketing plan was pretty good. They took a chance on a movie that nobody else did. Now waiting 5 years for a sequel? Yeah I'd say that's definitely suspect on their part.

[Arfguy]

This could be a topic for a great discussion, if people left their obvious prejudices at the door and make reasoned arguments for and against. If you come in here with your opinion only and don't intend to change people's minds then we could have a good discussion.

Now, I don't think it's the greatest franchise. I absolutely love the MCU and love what it has achieved. I think you really need to define by what you mean "Greatest." Is it financially? Is it longevity? Is it artistically? Is it culturally?

I think the questions of finance and artistically are moot, to me anyway. There's a lot of films that have made a lot of money but we look back at them and we wouldn't say they are great. Just like we wouldn't say McDonalds has the greatest food or Toyota has the greatest cars.

The question of artistry is more subjective. I appreciate Kieran Frost's comments on the Statue of David and Venus de Milo - really thought-provoking. But I disagree with the point to say there's art in what the filmmakers are doing but the product isn't art itself. To put any film together is a piece of art, especially ones as large and complicated as these. A black and white photograph of a butt is art. The Simpsons is art. Cannibal Corpse is art. Twilight is art. Art is not determined by your liking or disliking it, because someone else will come along and like or dislike it.

Longevity: Nobody can deny the MCU has had a fantastic run. I don't consider any of these films to be flops. Someone mentioned Incredible Hulk. I disagree. I think a flop is two things: it doesn't make back its money, and it is critically panned. (As an aside, something can flop at the box office but get many more views later and become a cult hit and make money that way, but nevermind.) But in reality the MCU has only been going for twelve years. James Bond has been around since 1962, Star Wars since 1977. Let's wait a few decades and see.

Culturally: I think this is the most important. MCU has definitely had a massive cultural impact and has expanded nerd culture far and wide in the last decade. More and more people all across the globe are exposed to it. It's often kids' first foray into nerd culture and their first fandom. But there's an important distinction that needs to be made: MCU did not exist in a vacuum. These same characters have existed since for more than 80 years. Iron Man, while hardly a superstar superhero, wasn't an unknown quantity.

Who was Darth Vader? Who was Princess Leia? Luke Skywalker? Star Wars is the greatest, in my opinion. It's longevity and cultural significance outshine all others. I think you could argue it was the first fandom. Think about the toys, and how toy collecting exploded after that, not to mention the hunt for that mysterious Boba Fett figure. Think about the way it change cinema and reinvented the blockbuster, reinvigorated the sci-fi genre. Is Darth Vader not the greatest villain? It's had three sets of trilogies, all of which had made a stack of money. Nobody got tired, even if some of the output wasn't stellar.

It has even spawned a religion. And the line, "May the force be with you."

Just my opinion. Oh, and my favourite films are The Lord of the Rings, but I don't really consider them a franchise.

Well said. This kind of thinking I can get behind. Even if this is something no one agrees with, I can see time and thought being placed into it. Star Wars is hard to argue against, in all honesty. I don't know if a character like Thanos will have the same cultural impact as that of a Darth Vader, Hannibal Lecter, or Joker. In terms of iconic characters (not just superheroes), I can see more people wanting to be Han Solo (not only as cosplay, but maybe even in mannerism, attitude, philosophy) than that of Tony Stark.

The other aspect of it is...Star Wars really did change the way big budget movies are made. I was watching this video about about how they filmed some of the space battle and my goodness, some of the tricks they had to pull off sounded exhausted. Yet there was George Lucas, with a massive vision that he did not want to compromise on.

I don't say any of this as a way to diminish what the MCU has done. The MCU has literally made me a Captain America fan and I think that's something. The MCU has made people aware of talking raccoons and trees, artifacts of mass distruction and far off worlds and life. However, I think it may be a little too early to judge the staying power of the MCU.

[Arfguy]

Am I the only person who doesn't get the appeal of LOTR not the books or films?

I have not read the books. I'm actually don't read a lot of books.

I love the movies, though. They are something truly special. Even before I watched some behinds the scene stuff, I had read about how they were filming all three movies at once. I remember that was a huge deal at the time, because most studios would not green light a trilogy without seeing the first movie.

When you do get around to some of the behind the scene stuff (Corridor Crew do an excellent job in explaining how some things were filmed and the challenges involved), it just goes to show you what a huge deal it was. The work that went into bringing these characters to film was substantial.

If you toss that all aside, you still get one Hell of an adventure. To see Frodo and Sam go from everyhobbit to heroes that even kings bow to? That's something special. I don't give a **** about people talking about the eagles being a massive plot hole, because then you wouldn't have the movies. What's the point of having such an adventure if all you're interested in is question why it exists? Better to just sit in a room and use your imagination, no? Then, there is nothing wrong with it because everything can be adjusted and modified without criticism.

[Powerboy]

If you want to go that route, you also have to analyze the time period movies are released. A movie theater release in 1977 has different competition for peopleÂ’s attention spans that one released in 2019. The world is different.

But donÂ’t let that distract one from any point theyÂ’re trying to make.

Also, itÂ’d be neat to fairly analyze the negative aspects of inflation affecting movie theater attendance. We know wage inflation hasnÂ’t kept up well; was taking a family out to see Star Wars in 1977 relatively cheaper than to see a movie in 2019?

ThereÂ’s also time spent in theaters to examine (which can be slightly countered by how many theaters released in); 18 weeks for Star Wars, 8 for Endgame.

Basically: if youÂ’re going to analyze something...analyze it, donÂ’t cherry pick data.

While adjusting for inflation is far better than going with dollar for dollar without adjusting which is ridiculous for moves from vastly different time periods or even a decade or so, and while number of tickets sold would be even better if we had access to that information, trying to compare movies from drastically different times is ultimately pointless and done for publicity. P.R. departments or fans will say, "Well, this run of the mill movie must be great because it made more than Gone with the Wind did on it's first run. Let's ignore that a ticket costs ten dollars now as opposed to ten cents or something then so GwtW would have to sell a hundred tickets to every one of this so-so movie.

On the other hand, there were no DVDs or Blueray then. There wasn't even television. So movies got released again and again and again and people went to see them rather than watch television or rent a DVD or play a computer game or even listen to a radio drama.

Gone with the Wind, as an example, may have put the most hind ends in seats of any movie in history but their are pro and con circumstances in declaring that to be the be and end all of popularity. As you seem to imply, it would be better to say that it was the most popular movie of that time and what the culture was then and it can never lose that number one position. But there are so many pros and cons it becomes impossible to prove anything but a personal preference in arguing it's popularity compared to a time like now when movies and especially "talkies" are not a hot new item anymore and there are multiple competitors both in terms of the number of movies and other distractions.

Star Wars was a phenomenon in it's time but it also had nothing else like it. Superman the Movie was wonderful. But what serious competition cam out that year or the year before or ever? What was the next big superhero movie? It was Superman II. In other words, there was no competition.

Again, just agreeing that you cannot, in any valid way, compare the success of movies decades apart. There are too many variables. People can only argue based on a desire to elevate one move or another to "greatest". Star Wars was the greatest space opera of the 1970s. Superman wad the greatest superhero movie of the 1970s.

[Kieran_Frost]

RELEVANT INFO ON RELEASE DATES
Iron Man - 02 May 2008
incredible Hulk - 13 Jun 2008
Iron Man 2 - 07 May 2010
Thor - 06 May 2011
Captain America: the First Avenger - 22 Jul 2011
Avengers - 04 May 2012
Thor 2 - 08 Nov 2013
Ant-Man - 17 Jul 2015
Doctor Strange - 04 Nov 2016

And then you have:
Black Panther - 16 Feb 2018
Captain Marvel - 08 Mar 2019

You don’t think (American) Black History Month was a good time to release Black Panther?

Well Febuary is black history month lol just saying.

For a SUMMER blockbuster... NO!!!! It was a terrible time to release it. Firstly, Black Panther isn't American! Secondly, when have you known Marvel to care about anything but money? Come on... they allow any and all homophobic countries to cut out anything remotely gay in their films because money trumps principles. They don't include LGBT+ characters because it wouldn't go down well abroad. If it was purely about Disney wanting it to succeed they would have done a summer blockbuster as usual... they didn't want it to succeed. It was a fluke! It was something they never intended. Black History Month was the perfect excuse for them to dump it in February, and when it didn't do well use that as an excuse to not do more.

Oprah released the Butler (2013) in August. Ava DuVernay released the 13th (2016) in October. Steve McQueen released 12 Years A Slave (2013) in October. You think they have less reverence for Black History Month than Marvel? No, they did it to be smart, to give the films the best shot at the Oscars. But Marvel? Money making Marvel put reverence for Black History Month over profit???

They took a chance on a movie that nobody else did. Now waiting 5 years for a sequel? Yeah I'd say that's definitely suspect on their part.

Well they are a small company, pushing through a movie like that in two years would be impossible... Endgame says hi...

[Jokerz79]

For a SUMMER blockbuster... NO!!!! It was a terrible time to release it. Firstly, Black Panther isn't American! Secondly, when have you known Marvel to care about anything but money? Come on... they allow any and all homophobic countries to cut out anything remotely gay in their films because money trumps principles. They don't include LGBT+ characters because it wouldn't go down well abroad. If it was purely about Disney wanting it to succeed they would have done a summer blockbuster as usual... they didn't want it to succeed. It was a fluke! It was something they never intended. Black History Month was the perfect excuse for them to dump it in February, and when it didn't do well use that as an excuse to not do more.

Oprah released the Butler (2013) in August. Ava DuVernay released the 13th (2016) in October. Steve McQueen released 12 Years A Slave (2013) in October. You think they have less reverence for Black History Month than Marvel? No, they did it to be smart, to give the films the best shot at the Oscars. But Marvel? Money making Marvel put reverence for Black History Month over profit???

Well they are a small company, pushing through a movie like that in two years would be impossible... Endgame says hi...

Let me get this straight Disney spent 200 million and marketing on a movie so it could fail? This is as crazy as they bought theaters out for Captain Marvel.

Do you know what Bob Iger's 3 biggest achievements are? Buying IP's/Fox, SW, and Marvel, Disney+, and building Shanghai Disneyland.

I can guarantee you for Marvel Studio BP was a character they wanted to use but for Disney it was a stepping stone into eventually building a park in Africa with a Wakanda Magic Kingdom.

[Kieran_Frost]

Let me get this straight Disney spent 200 million and marketing on a movie so it could fail? This is as crazy as they bought theaters out for Captain Marvel.

a) $200 million is really nothing to Disney. b) "failing" by making a decent profit (in my opinion) was the goal, not "failing" as in making nothing. It's Marvel, it wasn't going to make nothing, but it was never intended to be this colossal Oscar nominated for Best Picture success. I'm not saying Disney/Marvel hated it's success, but reaping the reward is not the same thing as aiming for a smash hit. And how did they follow it up? Capitalising on a success/a trend is an instantaneous thing; and I'm seeing nothing to imply they are going where the money is (which is normally their MO). So I have to ask myself: why?

I can guarantee you for Marvel Studio BP was a character they wanted to use but for Disney it was a stepping stone into eventually building a park in Africa with a Wakanda Magic Kingdom.

Oh my GOD, I'd love to go to that!!!!

[Colossus1980]

If you want to go that route, you also have to analyze the time period movies are released. A movie theater release in 1977 has different competition for people’s attention spans that one released in 2019. The world is different.

With the way the world is today, the attention span grows shorter every year. Too many things vying for space up there. No way the MCU can hold a candle to any cultural events back in the 70's.

[Midvillian1322]

Also Despite being about Wakanda the central theme of the story of Black panther is the African American experience and lack of cultural identity and heritage. It very much is relevant to America more so then any other country.

[CliffHanger2]

RELEVANT INFO ON RELEASE DATES
Iron Man - 02 May 2008
incredible Hulk - 13 Jun 2008
Iron Man 2 - 07 May 2010
Thor - 06 May 2011
Captain America: the First Avenger - 22 Jul 2011
Avengers - 04 May 2012
Thor 2 - 08 Nov 2013
Ant-Man - 17 Jul 2015
Doctor Strange - 04 Nov 2016

And then you have:
Black Panther - 16 Feb 2018
Captain Marvel - 08 Mar 2019



For a SUMMER blockbuster... NO!!!! It was a terrible time to release it. Firstly, Black Panther isn't American! Secondly, when have you known Marvel to care about anything but money? Come on... they allow any and all homophobic countries to cut out anything remotely gay in their films because money trumps principles. They don't include LGBT+ characters because it wouldn't go down well abroad. If it was purely about Disney wanting it to succeed they would have done a summer blockbuster as usual... they didn't want it to succeed. It was a fluke! It was something they never intended. Black History Month was the perfect excuse for them to dump it in February, and when it didn't do well use that as an excuse to not do more.

Oprah released the Butler (2013) in August. Ava DuVernay released the 13th (2016) in October. Steve McQueen released 12 Years A Slave (2013) in October. You think they have less reverence for Black History Month than Marvel? No, they did it to be smart, to give the films the best shot at the Oscars. But Marvel? Money making Marvel put reverence for Black History Month over profit???


Well they are a small company, pushing through a movie like that in two years would be impossible... Endgame says hi...

This is what I'm talking about when I say a cultural disconnect. So you don't see the connection between a Black Panther movie and Black History month. Fine apparently black people did and helped to make the movie a monster. You see that as Marvel just dumping the movie in February because that's a bad time for a summer blockbuster. But it wasn't a summer blockbuster IW was Marvel's line up for the summer. Clearly BP over performed that doesn't mean they wanted the movie to fail. Like really that's conspiracy theory level stuff. A lot of this shouldn't really have to be explained.
Then you bring up movies like the Butler...really? You think black people were excited for The Butler and 12 years a Slave the same way they were about BP? And Disney is a small company? I'm gonna head out.

[sammy_hansen]

Now lets examine the first Star Wars, which adjusted for inflation is 1,497,057,186 for its domestic box office, except the population at the time for Canada and the US was about 266 mill. So plugging in the same math about 149,705,719 individual tickets purchased, or about 56.2% of the population. Of course people saw this film more than 1 time, but I'm actually letting Endgame have an advantage as 3D tickets cost more than regular ones because you're paying for an additional feature. Nevertheless, if you ever want to know why Star Wars is so beloved and influential, having over 50% of the North American population watch something in theatres is the reason.

Also, if you're wondering why I chose domestic box office numbers and not total its because, for the vast majority of you, China is not your culture! When people throw around international box office numbers and claim this means that the film is cultural significant, they are committing a deception, whether intentional or not.

I really dislike the focus on the "domestic" box office when it should be termed the USA box office. America is not the centre of the world and China is not the whole locus of the "International" box office. If a movie holds the number 1 spot for 6 weeks in 30 countries then yeah it will likely have made a ton of money AND had a cultural impact. As far as I can tell, this thread isn't about which is the greatest franchise in America. This seems to be an argument that if the MCU makes a whole bunch of money in a whole bunch of non-USA countries that it doesn't really matter because only USA matters.

Also, (and I don't mean this to sound dismissive) but calculating ticket prices and populations and cinema runs and box office gross is simply a way of people saying "the numbers don't lie." I really, really dislike that claim. Numbers can be inaccurate all the time. I think it was Powerboy who said it’s not really useful to compare films across generations to say which is greater, and I agree with that. Certain films made a stack of money in a certain time period - I'm happy to leave it at that.

For a SUMMER blockbuster... NO!!!! It was a terrible time to release it. Firstly, Black Panther isn't American! Secondly, when have you known Marvel to care about anything but money? Come on... they allow any and all homophobic countries to cut out anything remotely gay in their films because money trumps principles. They don't include LGBT+ characters because it wouldn't go down well abroad. If it was purely about Disney wanting it to succeed they would have done a summer blockbuster as usual... they didn't want it to succeed. It was a fluke! It was something they never intended. Black History Month was the perfect excuse for them to dump it in February, and when it didn't do well use that as an excuse to not do more.

Oprah released the Butler (2013) in August. Ava DuVernay released the 13th (2016) in October. Steve McQueen released 12 Years A Slave (2013) in October. You think they have less reverence for Black History Month than Marvel? No, they did it to be smart, to give the films the best shot at the Oscars. But Marvel? Money making Marvel put reverence for Black History Month over profit???

A bit too conspiracy theory-ish for me. But your entitled to your opinion. I'm not gonna pretend like Disney/Marvel is some version of Movies Without Borders who are making films out of the goodness of their hearts. But you can make art (whoops, sorry!) that is both critically and commercially successful and culturally resonant. Choosing February is just savvy marketing, the same way you pick Valentine's Day for a rom-com or Christmas for Home Alone.

Black Panther exceeded expectations. Aquaman exceeded expectations. Is anyone saying Warner/DC dumped Aquaman in its release slot? Seems to be a bit of revisionism here.

[Username taken]

Marvel/Disney heavily promoted Black Panther before its release. I would argue it did as well as it did because it was released during Black history month. Marvel/Disney spent millions promoting it like an event and releasing it that month was a pretty historic moment.It was marketed as a cultural event and it lined up with a cultural month in the lives of African-Americans.

A lot of African-Americans that went to see it probably wouldn't have if it was marketed as just another blockbuster.

It wasnt "pushed" out at all. Marvel/Disney knew exactly what they were doing and it worked out almost perfectly for them.

[Bunch of Coconuts]

As a side note, Black Panther’s domestic gross was 52% of its total intake, which is impressive.

Could it have done better during the summer? Who knows. But I’m willing to bet February was the best month to release it.

[Username taken]

As a side note, Black Panther’s domestic gross was 52% of its total intake, which is impressive.

Could it have done better during the summer? Who knows. But I’m willing to bet February was the best month to release it.

Definitely.

It added to the event feel of the movie.

Not to mention there's very little competition in February which really helped its gross.