So you guys have NOT read comics in the 80's? Because most of them took place in their respective universes (Marvel hadn't dived deep into the mutltiverse at that stage, and much of what DC did was Earth 1, with Infinity Inc. and All Star Squadron being the regular titles for Earth 2). And despite DC's need to create the Crisis on Infinite Earths, it all seemed to work pretty well.
And for years before that... they shared the same universe, though]
I didn't read many comics when I grew up. I only became aware of certain comics years later after the films. I do know that when I was watching Michael Keaton as Batman, I wasn't asking myself if it was in the same universe as Christopher Reeve's Superman because I really didn't care. I only cared about how good the movie was and I don't need a shared universe for that. Blade, Xmen and the Sami Rami Spidermans were great films without a shared universe. When I was watching the last Spiderman flick and Maguire asks Holland "What's an Avenger?" I laughed because it reminded me of a time when Marvel characters were entertaining on their own.
Just so you know,
@TREK_GOD_1 and
@ichab , I AM VERY aware of the mutiple SPidermen. The thing is , Tom Holland's Spiderman appeared just about when Tobey Maguire would have "retired" anyway. So I wouldn''t have considered that overlap -- rather it would be the RIGHT time for a new dominant incarnation. I see Garfield's version as Sony's greed to keep the movie rights, and thus why it ultimately failed. (However, I appreciated No Way Home's redemption of that version). The thing is...I hope that when Holland feels he is done with Spidey (I am guessing 5-7 years), that they then go with Miles Morales. We can diversify in a natural way while giving Spiderman a fresh look for the next generation. We are getting that with Iron Man, and already with Hawkeye and Black Widow.
No Way Home just said that all three Spidermen exist at the same time. And I won't be surprised if Garfield is back playing Spiderman again. I also won't be surprised if we get Miles Morales in lived action soon, since Electro pretty much foreshadowed that in the film. If Holland does another film and Sony decides to do a Garfield or Morales Film, would you say that's a mistake or a good idea? I know I'd be exited to have more than one live action Spiderman on the big screen.
With X-Men... that too is 20 years old... they ended it with Logan (but sputtered out with Dark Phoenix and New Mutants), so a new version will be welcome.
I wasn't going to mention X-Men since until recently that was ran by Fox, but now that you bring it up, there were two versions of the X-men with both appearing in Days of Future's Past. The only thing consistent about that series was how inconsistent it was with its characters and how much it changed its own canon.
Arrowverse Flash was 25 years after the 1990 version. And they created AWESOME buzz for the new show by showing respect with that came before by John Wesley Schipp's role. They didn't NEED to do Jay Garrick of the death of Earth 90 FLash...but that too worked out.
Haven't watched any of those shows, but if people like them, who cares?
As for the Hulk & RHodey... these are examples of how Marvel was able to smoothly fix a problem without disrupting the overall flow. I don't think either actor made such an impression at their first go around that it hugely hurt anything moving forward (as opposed to if RDJ was fired after the first Iron Man; we will see how they handle BLack Panther). That's fine if you want to debate that point. But i feel like they did a better job than what DC has done.
Unless you go back to Batman in the 90s, I fail to see where DC has done a poor job replacing actors.
I understand that most of you guys don't want to follow everything anyway. That's fine.But MCU is set up, NOT JUST for those who want to follow everything, but if you only like one type (such as the sillier Guardians of the Galaxy, or the Afrocentric Black Panther), there is room for you too. You can follow your "thing" just fine, though those who embrace to the whole MCU get some EXTRA enjoyment.
It isn't that simple. Making every show and movie share the same universe means one guy or team gets a say in everything that is made, which greatly hampers directors. It's why
so many directors have no interest in working for Marvel again.
Also, it would be nice to watch a Spiderman movie without another MCU character hogging the spotlight or being a major part of the story. Holland has done three Spiderman films and not once was he allowed to shine on his own. Someone needs to remind Marvel that Spiderman was successful on his own long before Marvel decided to start making these movies themselves.
You guys say you won't follow other versions if you don't like it. That's fine and all, but from a business standpoint, why would they want to make more stuff if they can't make money, which will happen if they can't generate buzz about the "next big thing"/get bad buzz from what comes out?
What's The Batman's box office again? Seems the buzz worked just fine and the knowledge of multiple Batmans hasn't hurt it one bit.
