Is The MCU The Greatest Franchise Of All Time?

[Kieran_Frost]

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

I don't think there is anything wrong with that, high fantasy is not for everyone. And the LOTR is... the grandfather of high fantasy. It's the one! But it's a genre you don't feel particularly enamored with, there's nothing wrong with that. I, for example, have no affinity to sport. I don't care, I don't feel that competitive streak. So very, VERY few sports movies interest me (and none of them have made it into my "Top 100 Greatest Films"). And that's okay. We must bring personal opinion to our evaluations, or we're being dishonest with our tastes.

When I said MCU are the status quo, it means their movies do not have any extra layer of coverage that can bold well if they were not supposedly about comic books. They don’t offer a different mind. Their specialness is the link that binds every film together. Happily, this is enough to call it the greatest franchise of all time.

Agreed to all of this; the specialness is the connectivity. The feeling of a shared universe. But there is no depth. (some) X-men films did a great job of using the mutant metaphor to parallel LGBT+ people in real life. It added a nuance and commentary I've not seen in any of the MCU films (even if they are better films overall, in terms of technicality). I want a film to say something. I love entertainment, there is definitely a place for that in cinema... but when entertainment ALSO makes me feel things, makes a statement, beautifully conveys an idea and a through thought... damn... it's the best. It's the peak!

[Powerboy]

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Firstly, you're comparing the MCU's 17th film to 3 films. It took them 17 more tries, nearly two decades later. No-one's getting a medal for that. That's not applause worthy by comparison. Secondly a black solo superhero isn't shifting anything. We'd already had a successful trilogy with Blade years ago, and black superheroes had been in nearly every Marvel film. Had it been an Asian or latino lead solo film, there would be more cause to toot the "shifting status quo" argument, as they get massively overlooked (and are far more absent in the MCU than black superheroes). Plus Black Panther had no LGBT+ characters. Now that WOULD have shifted the status quo. Unlike LOTR that had no black characters in the novel, Black Panther mythos has some pretty major LGBT characters. Ultimately the film followed the standard Marvel formula, using a hero they already debuted previously. The fact it was a predominantly black cast is very applause worthy, that I do agree with; and unique. But 17 years later, and 14 more attempts than LOTR, if all you have is "it had a mostly black cast" I see that as no more "shifting the status quo" than a fantasy film 20 years ago breaking into mainstream in a way no-one had before. BOTH were shifting the status quo, in different ways. But Black Panther certainly wasn't doing in it such a way that blows all others out the water (esp. when you factor in one was in 2001 the other 2018). 17th film. Same formula. Established hero. No LGBT+ characters. In my head I'm conjuring up Meryl Streep's line in the Devil Wears Prada (2006) "flowers... for spring... groundbreaking."

I would say that Blade had nowhere close to the cultural impact that Black Panther did. Yes, BP had a huge buildup of other movies but that gets into the territory of any Star Wars movie after the original having points subtracted because some of it depended on the buildup from before.

I am certainly not arguing that there have not been other movies that had a similar or greater impact. "In the Heat of the Night" comes readily to mind. The Shaft movies in the 1970s maybe. But, for anything I would consider recent or in the culture as it currently exists, there have certainly been great movies but, in terms of that specific cultural impact with a huge number of people, I can't think of anything that equals or surpasses BP.

I'm not saying that makes it one bit better or one bit worse as a movie. But I'm talking about the cultural impact.

[stargazer01]

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

No. I don't care for the story or the movies. I do appreciate the high production values, but that's it. The movies bore me.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

No lol. At least not if quality is in any way a feature. Financially yeah but that’s one part inflation and one part volume

[Kieran_Frost]

I would say that Blade had nowhere close to the cultural impact that Black Panther did.

I don't remember the specific fallout from it, I was a teenager at the time and not paying attention to those things BUT I feel, at the back of my mind, recalling a greater trend in vampire themed films around then. I can't remember if it added to that, or was the cause of??? It certain was very well known at the time.

Yes, BP had a huge buildup of other movies but that gets into the territory of any Star Wars movie after the original having points subtracted because some of it depended on the buildup from before.

Have the newest Star Wars films (or even the prequels) done much cultural impact? Beyond continuing the nostalgia for the original trilogy by keeping it fresh in the mind. From the prequels... Darth Maul is one of the only things I still see get referenced today (and Jar Jar Binks, only because he was terrible). Certainly nothing has come close to "I am your father." But that seems an unfair bar to set, as FEW lines of all cinema are as iconic.

I am certainly not arguing that there have not been other movies that had a similar or greater impact. "In the Heat of the Night" comes readily to mind. The Shaft movies in the 1970s maybe. But, for anything I would consider recent or in the culture as it currently exists, there have certainly been great movies but, in terms of that specific cultural impact with a huge number of people, I can't think of anything that equals or surpasses BP.
I'm not saying that makes it one bit better or one bit worse as a movie. But I'm talking about the cultural impact.

Black Panther did have cultural impact, definitely. Hell, RuPaul's Drag Race has referenced it 4 times now, and had a whole acting challenge called "Why it gotta be Black? Panther." I just disagree with the logic the ONLY way to quantify "status quo shifting" is racially. It just feels very limiting. How long the culture 'impact' lasts, we shall see. I do think the phrase "Wakanda Forever" will be around for a long time.

[Kieran_Frost]

[skyvolt2000]

Blade was made at a time where someone in POWER was not actively trying to prevent it from being made.

The President of the United States at that time was all white guys.
There were no "fanboys", "gators" or entitlement trolls-trying to make it fail or review bomb it before it was out.
No one was using China as a weapon to fight black lead films from being made.
No John Boyega HATE. No Michael B Jordan must be run out of Hollywood over Fantastic Four.

We are talking 20 years ago. Aside from 3 Blade films-what other hero films did we get with a black lead? Catwoman and some would say Hancock.

There was a 10 year lull between another black hero lead film.

The Black Panther wave was a result of FRUSTRATION by people who were tired of hearing excuse after excuse after excuse. While white guys could make flop after flop after flop and it was never used against ALL white heroes nor anyone who did the film.

Along with frustration of so called black film makers who had ZERO issue with making movies about black men in drag, weak as water black females and so on. Yet NONE of them came with the check book for Static, Icon, Hardware, Midnight Tiger and all the other black heroes. Many could have been made at 50-75% the budget of Black Panther.

From the movie itself to all the merchandise (that you could actually go to ANY store to buy) and folks treating the film like it was going to the prom or church.

Blade kicked the door open for Black heroes. He did it 3 times. Black Panther waltz in like he OWNED the place.

We don't get Black Panther without BLADE. First and foremost. 3 movies-that is an exclusive club-Superman, Batman & Blade. Let that sink in. A guy who could not sell a comic book series. Had 3 movies before WONDER WOMAN-the ICON Wonder Woman. Before guys like Hal Jordan, Flash and Cap America.

That is Blade's cultural impact. Just like Static-having a show before a LOT of folks and outlasting some of them.

[Pinsir]

The issue with people citing box office gross is that your basically putting it on a sliding scale. You see there is a thing called inflation, things cost more nowadays. A pack of gum use to cost 5 cents a hundred years ago, but we recognize that it didn't cost 5 of 'our' cents. MCU fans are already playing funny with the math, since more people saw Avatar in theatres and it has a greater adjusted gross, so the only reason why Endgame is the 'highest' grossing film of all time is because its more recent than Avatar. So its guaranteed that so long as movie theatres don't disappear, a future franchise will inevitably surpass it.

I also did some quick math; If we take the domestic box office number of Endgame (858,373,000) and say give a semi-reasonable allotment for the ticket price (I'm using 10 dollars) we can get a rough assessment of how many people saw the film (about 85,837,300) and percentage total of the current population that follows under the domestic box office numbers (about 359 mill) we can determine about 23.9% of the population saw it. Of course, this only accounts for individual tickets purchased, so people seeing the film over and over again get counted more than once.

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.

[Bunch of Coconuts]

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.

But don’t let that distract one from any point they’re trying to make.

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

There’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 you’re going to analyze something...analyze it, don’t cherry pick data.

[Speed Force League Unlimited]

How's the merchandise doing for these movies? Toys and stuff?

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

No. I don't care for the story or the movies. I do appreciate the high production values, but that's it. The movies bore me.

You two are monsters who should write a 1,000 words essay each apologizing for your orc like taste.

Don't mind me joking around, I don't feel the love for that franchise either. It's not because it's fantasy though.

[Midvillian1322]

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.

But don’t let that distract one from any point they’re trying to make.

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

There’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 you’re going to analyze something...analyze it, don’t cherry pick data.

this is why I hate the inflation debate people use it to justify they're side and ignore all the other factors.

But The MCU in 20+ movies in and hasn't had a single flop or movie with a less then favorable reaction. Star wars and star trek and LoTR are the only things coming close. Oh and Fast and Furious I suppose. But yea a long running franchise past 3 movies isn't something that happens alot. 20+ is insane and I'm sure we're in for another 20.


Also I as well am not a fan of LoTR. I fell asleep in theaters watching the second and third film as a kid. Never tried to rewatxh them I probably should. As an adult I might appreciate it more

[Kieran_Frost]

In terms of inflation vs society... again, I think deciding on what's "the greatest" is based on either profit or how many people saw it is just a fool's errand. That has nothing to do with art being great. Being successful, yes. But "Great"? It's immaterial. Far more people saw Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009) than Out of Africa (1985); but no-one with a critical eye would say Transformers 2 is a "greater" film.

Blade was made at a time where someone in POWER was not actively trying to prevent it from being made.
The President of the United States at that time was all white guys.
There were no "fanboys", "gators" or entitlement trolls-trying to make it fail or review bomb it before it was out.
No one was using China as a weapon to fight black lead films from being made.
No John Boyega HATE. No Michael B Jordan must be run out of Hollywood over Fantastic Four.
We are talking 20 years ago. Aside from 3 Blade films-what other hero films did we get with a black lead? Catwoman and some would say Hancock.
There was a 10 year lull between another black hero lead film.

See I love stuff like this, that's the fun of these debates, to inform us all and better our thinking. Thank-you.

Along with frustration of so called black film makers who had ZERO issue with making movies about black men in drag

Oh man, you'd HATE "Why it gotta be Black? Panther!" I think times are changing, and the slow breaking down on what it means to be "a man" and "a woman" are evolving. The idea a black cis man in drag can't be empowering, in the nicest possible way, is wrong.

That is Blade's cultural impact. Just like Static-having a show before a LOT of folks and outlasting some of them.

I think this is a very good point; that sometimes the cultural impact is NOT as obvious as it seems, but is very much rooted in what came before. We don't get C with going through A and B, etc. It's building blocks, it's baby step after baby step to reach the goal. We wouldn't have Brokeback Mountain (2005) had Rope (1948) and Victim (1961) not first broken down those barriers in their own way. THE DANGER with this thinking is where does it stop? Yes, we wouldn't have Black Panther without Blade. But we might not have Blade without Shaft. And so on, and so on, until we find ourselves saying "We wouldn't have had Black Panther without Shakespeare."

I think it's important to acknowledge what came before, while also praising a film for creating it's own cultural impact. Brokeback Mountain did that, regardless of what came before, it became a cultural wave in of its own right.

How's the merchandise doing for these movies? Toys and stuff?

That's a good point, if we think in terms of merchandise, I don't think the MCU even cracks the 'Top Ten' most successful merchandise. Stars Wars does, to my knowledge, but not the Top 5.

[Pinsir]

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.

I agree, there is now more media to consume than ever before and a broader degree of tastes, where as before things were more homogenous. this is one reason why I don't think the MCU is going to have that much of a cultural impact, its just one big franchise among many. Even if its the biggest movie franchise that doesn't mean much in this day and age. If the video games haven't already, they will soon eclipse all other forms of media as the most popular form of entertainment and people spend more time playing, thinking and spending money on them than they will on the MCU.

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

My math is pretty basic and there are tons of things I can't really account for everything. Generally speaking people attend theatres far less than the decades prior, the tickets cost a lot and as you said wage inflation for most workers has been stagnant for decades. What was once a weekly ritual is now a semi-monthly one.

I did find a number for the ticket price for 1977 films (2.23 buckos) and doing the same basic math except with the unadjusted domestic numbers, I got 80% of the combined Canadian and US population seeing Star Wars in theatres.

There’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 you’re going to analyze something...analyze it, don’t cherry pick data.

I'm not sure why you're accusing me of acting in bad faith. I'm don't know what the run time would have been for any movie in that era. Was 18 weeks the norm or wasn't it? Even then, I don't think people saw Star Wars because movie theatres ran it for 18 weeks. I think the film ran for 18 weeks because demand was so high.

[CliffHanger2]

Black Panther did have cultural impact, definitely. Hell, RuPaul's Drag Race has referenced it 4 times now, and had a whole acting challenge called "Why it gotta be Black? Panther." I just disagree with the logic the ONLY way to quantify "status quo shifting" is racially. It just feels very limiting. How long the culture 'impact' lasts, we shall see. I do think the phrase "Wakanda Forever" will be around for a long time.

I don't think anyone here argued the only way to quantify status quo shifting was through race. But BP did the damn thing and yeah the MCU gets a lot of credit for that.

[Kieran_Frost]

I don't think anyone here argued the only way to quantify status quo shifting was through race.

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

But BP did the damn thing and yeah the MCU gets a lot of credit for that.

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.