• 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
MikHutch said:
I'm aware. But people only ever trot this out when some celebrity is accused of sexual assault. As if that's the biggest miscarriage of justice in American history

And that's never been the basis in practice
Click to expand...
Aspirational should not be curtailed due to poor practice.

And of course people bring it out. That's the ideal, that's what we strive for, and would want if we were to face legal consequences. And even more so with the heroes that we currently have in Hollywood, who are lionized and it's difficult to imagine such wrong doing.
 
fireproof78 said:
Aspirational should not be curtailed due to poor practice.

And of course people bring it out. That's the ideal, that's what we strive for, and would want if we were to face legal consequences. And even more so with the heroes that we currently have in Hollywood, who are lionized and it's difficult to imagine such wrong doing.
Click to expand...

Who's curtailing anything?
 
Just read about the accusations against Vin Diesel and yikes. I'm not totally surprised, while I've enjoyed movies he's done, he's always given off kind of asshole vibes.
Christopher said:
I just don't see how they can do that with any integrity. I mean, they have literally set this up as an unbeatable threat to all existence, something far more dangerous and terrifying than Thanos. Something so horrible that He Who Remains believed it justified exterminating all other timelines so that at least one would survive. Something that Loki had to give up his independent existence to try to contain. It's just too big to "get out of the way quickly." It would make a mockery of the stories that set it up. Maybe that's less of an issue with Quantumania, but Loki certainly deserves better than to have the next project cursorily establish that everything Loki and the TVA fought for across two seasons was meaningless because it was all going to get cavalierly swept away soon enough.
Click to expand...
Yes, but if they do decide to bring in a new villain instead of recasting, there's really no way to satisfactorily end the storyline in the way it deserves. At least doing it that way would give it some of kind of an onscreen conclusion, and it be a quick and easy way to establish Doom or whoever they go with as a major threat who could be a danger to the whole multiverse. If nothing else it would at least be better than a quick off screen conclusion that is only established through dialogue.
So again, just to repeat this again, I would prefer they recast, because I want to see the storyline continue to the ending they intend.
 
JD said:
Yes, but if they do decide to bring in a new villain instead of recasting, there's really no way to satisfactorily end the storyline in the way it deserves.
Click to expand...

Which is why I said that they should recast. I can see no rational reason not to. Again, the decision to steer away from Kang is not about Jonathan Majors, at least not exclusively. It's about audiences not responding as hoped to Quantumania or the Kang character. So there's no reason they can't recast Kang long enough to give the story arc a satisfactory resolution. After all, he'd probably be a different incarnation like Immortus or Rama-Tut when he returned anyway.

Besides, my experience as a writer makes me skeptical of any statement that "There's no way" to do something in a story. I can't tell you how many times I've wrestled with a creative problem for days or weeks, despaired of ever finding a way to solve it, then gone for a long walk or taken a shower one morning and finally found an answer that was straightforward and obvious in retrospect. "There's no way" is what people say when they give up too soon to find a way.
 
JD said:
Sorry, let's make that I don't see an obvious way...
Click to expand...

Well, the people at Marvel have presumably been thinking about it constantly for months now, and actually getting paid to do so rather than musing about it in their spare time like we are. They've probably already got a plan that we won't find out about until later.
 
fireproof78 said:
Saying it's "never been the basis in practice" hints at the idea of we are not using guilty until proven innocent.

Even my predictor took that phrase as guilty until proven guilty. Not sure what that means ;)
Click to expand...

Not really what I'm saying. My point is the USA talks about innocent until proven guilty but it's not always practiced. Whole communities have been unfairly targeted but some online dudebros only care when their favorite celebrity gets caught committing a sex crime

Christopher said:
Which is why I said that they should recast. I can see no rational reason not to. Again, the decision to steer away from Kang is not about Jonathan Majors, at least not exclusively. It's about audiences not responding as hoped to Quantumania or the Kang character. So there's no reason they can't recast Kang long enough to give the story arc a satisfactory resolution. After all, he'd probably be a different incarnation like Immortus or Rama-Tut when he returned anyway.

Besides, my experience as a writer makes me skeptical of any statement that "There's no way" to do something in a story. I can't tell you how many times I've wrestled with a creative problem for days or weeks, despaired of ever finding a way to solve it, then gone for a long walk or taken a shower one morning and finally found an answer that was straightforward and obvious in retrospect. "There's no way" is what people say when they give up too soon to find a way.
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing why they should do anything but recast
 
So having re-upped D+ for What if and Echo yesterday I sat down to breakfast this morning to do my traditional rewatch of Werewolf By Night (because it's too good and too easy to watch to not see it at least once every time I re-up).

I have never noticed before - and I absolutely love - how Bernal actually based his mannerisms on a Jack Russell dog. Not only scratching his ear like a dog would, but he *literally* does a full circle turn around the spot on the floor before he sits down on it.
rolling-on-the-floor-laughing-1f923.png
 
Grendelsbayne said:
I think it's completely reasonable to call it a disaster given it clearly lost money (because of how high the budget was), which is exactly the opposite of what a movie studio wants. And it was literally the first MCU movie to be in that position since The Incredible Hulk in phase 1 before the MCU even caught on (not counting pandemic era films for obvious reasons).
Click to expand...

Grendelsbayne said:
Oh, I am, too. But the truth is still the truth and I don't see any point in trying to pretend Quantumania was actually successful when it clearly wasn't or actually reasonably popular when that clearly isn't the case (no matter how much more I liked the film than most people seemed to).
Click to expand...

TREK_GOD_1 said:
Estimated production budget was somewhere around $200 million + an estimated $100 million marketing budget, with final box office just over $476 million. That was not a hit.
Click to expand...

I was looking at numbers form Box Office Mojo on 2018 money and rankings vs. 2023

WHat makes things confusing is that Ant Man 3 was actually HIGHER ranking than Ant Man 2 (7 vs. 9 ), and actually had a higher opening weekend than Ant Man 2, and also domestically made about the same. But as @TREK_GOD_1 points out, the budget shows why even though what looks to be a success is more like a relative failure.

But also, it's more than just ANt Man. Mission Impossible in 2018 was number 8 with $220 but in 2023 was only #12 with $179, and it had pretty good hype (such as the BTS of Tom Cruise's stunt).

I suspect we will see a huge drop for Aquaman as well, so a lot of major

And looking back, it is also interesting to see that Black Panther DOmestically actually beat AVengers Endgame (though not worldwide)... and a lot of that i think is thanks to many people buying up theaters so students can see Black Panther (it was in theaters until August, so end of the year field trips for sure) ... and i think one of the major reasons why recasting wasn't chosen in that case.

Also, 2018 had 6 of the 10 superhero/comic book based movies in the top 10.

Christopher said:
Well, the people at Marvel have presumably been thinking about it constantly for months now, and actually getting paid to do so rather than musing about it in their spare time like we are. They've probably already got a plan that we won't find out about until later.
Click to expand...

So why are you chastising others who are merely speculating/articulating their desires? You are doing the same.

I personally am thinking they are waiting until they have some contracts signed and they are sure how things are set up. Right now, Marvel can't afford any "we looking to sign..." . Way too much uncertainty such as from COvid and the recent reshuffling of release dates has hurt them.

i think one of the things that made the MCU so favored previously was when we looked at release timelines of MCU vs. DCFU from 2015-2020, Marvel was pretty solid, while DC was a mess, including Flash not being released until 3 years after it was scheduled, and Cyborg completely disappearing. It was so crazy, that we started a new thread for DC "To Inifnity and Beyond"... though it looks like it will be finite by the end of 2023.
 
Grendelsbayne said:
So having re-upped D+ for What if and Echo yesterday I sat down to breakfast this morning to do my traditional rewatch of Werewolf By Night (because it's too good and too easy to watch to not see it at least once every time I re-up).

I have never noticed before - and I absolutely love - how Bernal actually based his mannerisms on a Jack Russell dog. Not only scratching his ear like a dog would, but he *literally* does a full circle turn around the spot on the floor before he sits down on it.
rolling-on-the-floor-laughing-1f923.png
Click to expand...

Dang, I didn't notice either. Good catch. Yea, WWbN was fun. I'm going to start watching What If? tonight
 
MikHutch said:
Not really what I'm saying. My point is the USA talks about innocent until proven guilty but it's not always practiced. Whole communities have been unfairly targeted but some online dudebros only care when their favorite celebrity gets caught committing a sex crime
Click to expand...
Yes, because humans are lazy.
 
MikHutch said:
Not to mention myopic and bigoted
Click to expand...
Mostly lazy. Expanding one's worldview requires work, introspection and empathy.

We default to our brain's mental shortcuts, heuristics, and rarely challenge them, due to our experiences. And then, if we do express an opinion, and get rejected, we are not likely to reflect, but become more entrenched.

It's hard to let it go and try something new, and if we fail we are shamed for it. Thus, perputating a cycle.
 
Innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept for a court of law.

In the court of public opinion, it doesn’t apply.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YLu
The Knappos said:
Innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept for a court of law.

In the court of public opinion, it doesn’t apply.
Click to expand...

But it should, just as a matter of basic decency. If you assume someone's innocent and they turn out guilty, they're in the wrong. If you assume they're guilty when they're actually innocent, you're the one doing wrong. So it's best not to do that. Morality is about managing our own behavior first and foremost.
 
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