Is the Marvel Age Of Movies Done?

[Castle]

It isn't just Marvel. If Space Jam 2 falls hard it shows people are not coming back after opening weekend.

Space Jam does not have no where the big branding of Marvel. Can we really compare them?

[Username taken]

So isn’t the natural conclusion that “no movie is going to do well” instead of “lolMarvelisdead”?

That was my original argument.

For the middle of summer, this weekend’s projected box office numbers are just terrible.

We’re still in the middle of the pandemic and in Canada for example most theaters aren’t allowed to open to full capacity. And considering that Canada counts as part of the domestic box office, this suggests we’re still in an unusual situation.

And let’s be honest, a massive number of people are still weary about squeezing themselves next to others due to pandemic fears. I mean, I personally don’t move around with the same level of “carelessness” that I used to.

[Rincewind]

Space Jam does not have no where the big branding of Marvel. Can we really compare them?

Space Jam has basketball and the WB characters. The original is a beloved classic to an entire generation. So, yes. It is fair to compare them.

[Noodle]

Space Jam does not have no where the big branding of Marvel. Can we really compare them?

Having arguably the biggest basketball player in the world, as well as one of the longest running and recognizable cartoon franchises ever isn't "big branding"?

[Castle]

Having arguably the biggest basketball player in the world, as well as one of the longest running and recognizable cartoon franchises ever isn't "big branding"?

Compared to Marvel Disney, no (The Space Jam films) are not equal brandings.

[Noodle]

Compared to Marvel Disney, no (The Space Jam films) are not equal brandings.

Yeah, no. The Looney Tunes brand have sold more merch worldwide than Marvel could ever hope to. Hell, James himself has probably sold more jerseys alone than most the merch some of the characters Marvel have made movies of.

[chicago_bastard]

This actually can be now all be explained. The original Black Widow director, Lucrecia Martel left the film because she wondered why she did not get to direct her own CGI scenes, she opted for that. However Marvel told her not to worry about and they will take care everything. again, a weak weakness of their formula. Can you imagine WB telling Christopher Nolan that they he does not need to worry and they will take care of his VFX and action scenes? Nolan may not have been the best director of action in his TDK era, but at least he directed his own action scenes.

https://www.avclub.com/marvel-offere...cre-1831076365
Marvel offered to "take care of" action scenes if Lucrecia Martel would direct Black Widow

Honestly reading this stuff just makes me angry as a person who loves the art of films. I feel as if marvel is cheating out their directors. although none of these is surprising, because we have said many times here before. MCU movies are more manufactured than well made and when you hear Lucrecia story why she left and then watch the actual film.

Lucretia Martel wasn't the original director of Black Widow, she was one of 100 candidates for early consideration, she never even came close to being chosen for the gig and thus could never leave it in the first place. Cate Shortland who is much more acclaimed than Martel was Johansson's first choice from the beginning (Johansson was executive producer on the film and thus had a big say in that), it's just baffling how one can claim such nonsense all the time.

[CliffHanger2]

Yeah, no. The Looney Tunes brand have sold more merch worldwide than Marvel could ever hope to. Hell, James himself has probably sold more jerseys alone than most the merch some of the characters Marvel have made movies of.

I'm not saying you're wrong but you got any numbers on that? Seems like a bold statement.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

Yes.

And the Marvel age of TV has just begun....

[green_garnish]

Would not shoe in ''well received'' MCU movies when these movies are not taken seriously enough, there are many well received comic movies now, but only a few can NOT be called kid friendly cookie-cutter generic comic films.

I think at some point nearly every contributor to this thread has pointed out that Marvel is not cookie cutter, and been very specific about why, and yet this basic concept is something that seems to eternally escape you. This comment also betrays an underlying contempt for kid-friendly movies about characters that are inherently meant to be kid-friendly, yet you treat that concept like it's a failing. Superhero movies that are not kid-friendly have very little point to being made.

Also well made by MCU own standard, I feel is cracking big time finally. the reception of Black Widow, the CGI was quite the bad mess, compared to actually well made movies with well done CGI.

haven't seen Black Widow so I can't comment on how good it is, other than that doesn't seem to be a broad criticisim of the film so far. OTOH, the MOS, BvS, ZSJL films have all had terrible CGI, if not in actual image quality (which is suspect) then certainly in the way the CGI is edited.

This actually can be now all be explained. The original Black Widow director, Lucrecia Martel left the film

That's a handy excuse for a director who was never seriously a contender for the job in the first place. It's not like Zack Snyder or anything, who was actually hired for a job and then fired from it while everyone went along with a convenient PR excuse for stepping away.

Honestly reading this stuff just makes me angry as a person who loves the art of films.

You keep saying stuff like this, and then you follow it up with statemebnts like Snyder is an artuer, demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of quality fim making at any leve.

The Snyder Cut is going to find it easy to sail on this year as the best well made comic film in terms of pure RAW film making.

The Snyder cut is going to sail away into well-deserved obscurity. Little is remembered about it already, and in a couple of years it will be a trivia question.

[Vakanai]

I think at some point nearly every contributor to this thread has pointed out that Marvel is not cookie cutter, and been very specific about why, and yet this basic concept is something that seems to eternally escape you. This comment also betrays an underlying contempt for kid-friendly movies about characters that are inherently meant to be kid-friendly, yet you treat that concept like it's a failing. Superhero movies that are not kid-friendly have very little point to being made.

I have nothing to say against superhero movies for kids, so this is not an argument against them, but I've got to disagree with you that there's little point to superhero movies that aren't kid friendly. The Dark Knight (not R-rated, but clearly more adult oriented and aimed), Kick-Ass, Deadpool, Logan, Deadpool 2 have all shown there's a demand and a market for such films, and that they can be done very well. And that's all the point any film really has, to make a profit and to entertain.

[green_garnish]

I have nothing to say against superhero movies for kids, so this is not an argument against them, but I've got to disagree with you that there's little point to superhero movies that aren't kid friendly. The Dark Knight (not R-rated, but clearly more adult oriented and aimed), Kick-Ass, Deadpool, Logan, Deadpool 2 have all shown there's a demand and a market for such films, and that they can be done very well. And that's all the point any film really has, to make a profit and to entertain.

Dark Knight actually was kid-friendly, and was not well done. The editing alone was notoriously atrocious. The others you mention are based on material that was never kid-friendly to begin with, which puts them in a different genre than MCU and what it's based on.

[Noodle]

I'm not saying you're wrong but you got any numbers on that? Seems like a bold statement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...dia_franchises

I know Wikipedia isn't always 100% accurate, but these have citations so I'm a little more prone to believe it.

Looney Tunes - Retail sales – $14.477 billion
Marvel - Merchandise sales – $7.228 billion

The only thing that bumps Marvel above Looney Tunes is the box office revenue. The bulk of Looney Tunes stuff is on TV as opposed to movies, so I'm prone to exclude that. That's up to everyone's personal opinion, though.

[Castle]

Dark Knight actually was kid-friendly, and was not well done. The editing alone was notoriously atrocious. The others you mention are based on material that was never kid-friendly to begin with, which puts them in a different genre than MCU and what it's based on.

The dark knight, though pg 13 is not as kid friendly as the Marvel films. Maybe you can see the easiest explanation to this is in cinematography and special effects. TDK looks far more grounded and very less animated to the marvel films even for a 2008 film compared to the animated style of marvel films. MCU would never have done the dark knight in story either, Also No one tells Nolan how to make his movies.

Saying the film editing is notorious atrocious is....?. There is no film making objective technique backing that up, because in TDK for the most part , the scenes ran smoothly and flowed well as the story came together, and it is even very noticeable because back then comic films were not so clouded with CGI Action every 5 minutes , so the story scenes of the film all fell into place cohesively. that is what film editing is, also notice I defined it while using it to explain the film style of Nolan.

The others you mention are based on material that was never kid-friendly to begin with, which puts them in a different genre than MCU and what it's based on.

Deadpool, Deadpool 2 and Logan are still Marvel films. Also please don't also forget even their pg 13 movies like X2, The Wolverine and DOFP were not cookie cutter or made to be inherently kid friendly and this paved the way of their R movies later run.

This may be a dead horse topic, but it is laughable to compare what Marvel defines as kid friendly compared to other studios. you do know that, Thor Ragnarok, a film you have said you dislike is when marvel took the kid friendly definition too far , this is the reason the movie became a light hearted comedy and adapted the GOTG style. Snyder did not use the same approach of light hearted comedy, because he was going for something more than what marvel would have called kid friendly, this is why even if The Snyder Cut and Thor Ragnarok are both comic book movies. only one ( the snyder cut) can be compared to Lord of the rings with actual film making similarities.

[Castle]

I have nothing to say against superhero movies for kids, so this is not an argument against them, but I've got to disagree with you that there's little point to superhero movies that aren't kid friendly. The Dark Knight (not R-rated, but clearly more adult oriented and aimed), Kick-Ass, Deadpool, Logan, Deadpool 2 have all shown there's a demand and a market for such films, and that they can be done very well. And that's all the point any film really has, to make a profit and to entertain.

I find it funny on a thread called the age of marvel movies, we are arguing if and what for and against superhero movies are for kids. let me give a hint that even at marvel, this stuff is not as simple as some are making it look, where everything can be tied together.

James Gunn said recently that GOTG 3 will be heavier in story than the first 2 films. Wonder why he would say that, I am thinking because he knows and sees the writings is on the wall, also it may be that he has now done another comic film (Suicide Squad 2) and for the first time as a comic book director, worked without any restrictions, even to the point that he got the movie to be R

https://ew.com/movies/james-gunn-say...ll-be-heavier/
James Gunn says Guardians of the Galaxy 3 will be a 'heavier' story

Maybe the question I should ask the OP is why would Gunn be saying this. Also I doubt GOTG can be a real heavy movie like TDK that he thinks is also kid friendly. you cannot have a heavy movie and keep that amount of Disney quipping comedy and colourful animated cgi tone (already also seen in the Shag Chi Trailer) that so hindered the first 2 GOTG films because Disney wanted them to be for kids at the very core. I don't think this is how Nolan approached his comic films and the hard evidence is just there.