• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

What grade would you give the Marvel Cinematic Universe? (Ever-Changing Question)

  • Total voters
    185
Gaith said:
^ And, in the context of one person saying all others' opinions are "worthless blather," that quote isn't solipsistic...how?
Click to expand...
It's not merely solipsistic. It is actually quite enlightening to the state of a person's mind and their values.

Finding professional critics to be worthless is of course a selfish viewpoint, but it also establishes what a person takes as a important frame of reference for taking in information. And, in my opinion, going by one's own experience rather than accepting a person's word at face value is entirely valuable.
 
I don't disregard all opinions other than my own; I disregard the opinions of film critics and the data from aggregate websites specifically.
 
Turtletrekker said:
Per Forbes -- "Marvel Studios woes are overstated."

Shocking I tell you. Shocking.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhu...fbmE2PKAPGd1zhxLUATwAqC0qMDTKSLLGEZesRkPGKgrM
Click to expand...

Did you seriously just quote the ramblings of a Frobes Contributor as proof of something?

Just in case you don't know what a Frobes Contributor is...

"As of 2019 the company published 100 articles each day produced by 3,000 outside contributors who were paid little or nothing. This business model, in place since 2010, "changed their reputation from being a respectable business publication to a content farm," according to Damon Kiesow, the Knight Chair in digital editing and producing at the University of Missouri School of Journalism. Similarly, Harvard University's Nieman Lab deemed Forbes "a platform for scams, grift, and bad journalism" as of 2022.The contributor system has been criticized for enabling "pay-to-play journalism" and the repackaging of public relations material as news."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes
 
Rich Watson said:
Did you seriously just quote the ramblings of a Frobes Contributor as proof of something?

Just in case you don't know what a Frobes Contributor is...

"As of 2019 the company published 100 articles each day produced by 3,000 outside contributors who were paid little or nothing. This business model, in place since 2010, "changed their reputation from being a respectable business publication to a content farm," according to Damon Kiesow, the Knight Chair in digital editing and producing at the University of Missouri School of Journalism. Similarly, Harvard University's Nieman Lab deemed Forbes "a platform for scams, grift, and bad journalism" as of 2022.The contributor system has been criticized for enabling "pay-to-play journalism" and the repackaging of public relations material as news."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes
Click to expand...
I take them more serious than I would some random nobody on a YouTube channel or a bulletin board.
 
There are people that take joy in picking apart movies, picking apart trailers, picking apart popular opinion but some seem to just like to tweak people in message boards. :)
 
Rich Watson said:
Did you seriously just quote the ramblings of a Frobes Contributor as proof of something?

Just in case you don't know what a Frobes Contributor is...

"As of 2019 the company published 100 articles each day produced by 3,000 outside contributors who were paid little or nothing. This business model, in place since 2010, "changed their reputation from being a respectable business publication to a content farm," according to Damon Kiesow, the Knight Chair in digital editing and producing at the University of Missouri School of Journalism. Similarly, Harvard University's Nieman Lab deemed Forbes "a platform for scams, grift, and bad journalism" as of 2022.The contributor system has been criticized for enabling "pay-to-play journalism" and the repackaging of public relations material as news."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes
Click to expand...
That's a damn shame. They used to be a reputable source for business news.

Rich Watson said:
Strike's over!

https://deadline.com/2023/11/sag-strike-ends-actors-studios-deal-contract-1235566470/

But it will probably be January before shooting is back up and running again at this point.

So Cap 4 In the Summer and Wolverine 3 this time next year then.
Click to expand...
Yay!
 
Would it be cynical to hypopthicise that we'll be getting the Fantastic Four cast announcement and anything else they can throw out as soon as possible to distract from The Marvels box office?
 
JoeZhang said:
Early data suggests is this is crashing and burning internationally as well.
Click to expand...

Pretty abysmal numbers coming out. Looks like domestic is going to have to push hard to elevate this to a disappointment.

Perhaps an outright bomb is what's needed to provoke a course correction.
 
StarMan said:
Pretty abysmal numbers coming out. Looks like domestic is going to have to push hard to elevate this to a disappointment.

Perhaps an outright bomb is what's needed to provoke a course correction.
Click to expand...

By all accounts, they basically pulped the Daredevil show and started over, which suggests the course correction has already started.
 
StarMan said:
Perhaps an outright bomb is what's needed to provoke a course correction.
Click to expand...

You say that like it's a good thing, and it would be nice if it were, but I'm afraid the "course correction" will just be what the industry usually does -- assume that trying new things is bad and fall back on trying to copy what succeeded in the past. We've already heard rumors about them bringing Iron Man and Cap back. When has Hollywood ever learned the right lesson from a failure, or for that matter, from a success?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top