• 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
OK, so far so good...

The second paragraph swerves away completely from the point of view of the first. Whatever happened to the studio having unrealistic expectations? "BvS should have made TWO BILLION DOLLARSaaaarrrggh!!!" Says who? In any prior decade, who would have bought the premise that 874 million constitutes a flop?
This wasn't in a prior decade though. It was after tdk and avengers.
 
OK, so far so good...

The second paragraph swerves away completely from the point of view of the first. Whatever happened to the studio having unrealistic expectations? "BvS should have made TWO BILLION DOLLARSaaaarrrggh!!!" Says who? In any prior decade, who would have bought the premise that 874 million constitutes a flop?

The giant drop from first weekend to 2nd (beat out at the time only by 2003's Hulk for superhero movies) may have raised a few eyebrows.
 
OK, so far so good...

The second paragraph swerves away completely from the point of view of the first. Whatever happened to the studio having unrealistic expectations? "BvS should have made TWO BILLION DOLLARSaaaarrrggh!!!" Says who? In any prior decade, who would have bought the premise that 874 million constitutes a flop?

Because we're talking about two different movies which absolutely should have had very different levels of expectations based on their very different situations.

One was a Superman solo movie coming off a flop (SR) in an era where there had never been a succesful Superman solo movie (because the last one was decades prior).

The other was effectively a Justice League movie coming off a reasonable success (MoS) in an era where people had never even gotten to see the JL characters on screen together before, which should obviously drive the hype even further. And the Avengers proved (twice) how successful that Justice League-esque formula could be in the box office in that particular era and did so using far less popular characters than the ones that were in BvS (at least, traditionally popular). There was every reason to believe BvS should've outgrossed Avengers if it were even remotely as popular as a movie as Avengers was.

Also, as already mentioned, this is not just speculation. It's very clearly corroborated by BvS' monster opening weekend which clearly showcased the massive level of hype the movie had at the start. The only reason it came in under a billion is because that audience evaporated very quickly once they saw the actual movie.

And, just aside, I didn't call the movie a flop at all. I called it a massive disappointment, and that is a completely accurate description.
 
I don't agree. If most was seen as a disappointment, why did they put Snyder in charge of the whole universe?

Here's my recolllection of things.... when they first announced the DCFU, i thought they said that it was supposed to be director led, in that the director of each movie would have a greater say in how their film developed (as opposed to Kevin Feige overseeing and connecting their films) .

But it seems like as soon as they were making Man of Steel, they immediately had plans for sequels , starting with B v S, with JUstice League seemingly as part of the plan .

And unlike what @TREK_GOD_1 portrays in his messages, not every critic of the DCFU, and especially Zack Snyder, hates everything about his movies. I think many of us 1) actually like DC properties and want them to succeed and 2) saw a lot of good things within Snyder's films but 3) those things were sabotaged by the "mistakes" in them.

I think Zack Snyder really could have benefitted from a partner , especially one who knew and appreciated the source material, who could have balanced things out or said "this part isn't right." I mean, things like SUperman basically being super-important by having all of Kryptonian's DNA in him was not needed, not his "sacrifice" at the end of B v S (becuase we all knew he would come back easily)

It overshadowed all the great things about the films, such as Lois Lane, the next generation of WOnder WOman (with amazing theme), an Aquaman who was cool and not a joke...

OK, so far so good...

The second paragraph swerves away completely from the point of view of the first. Whatever happened to the studio having unrealistic expectations? "BvS should have made TWO BILLION DOLLARSaaaarrrggh!!!"

Says who? In any prior decade, who would have bought the premise that 874 million constitutes a flop?

I totally understand where you are coming from, but also, i think it's not unreasonable to expect movies with Superman and Batman to be more popular from the get-go than Marvel.... I truly believe those who were much more in the public's conscienceness than Marvels.

This might be in the DC thread...but someone had an analysis of the money situation, and how it panned out. Certainly if WW was the best DC FIlm in the US and Aquaman worldwide, how did SUperman not reach those levels...i mean he should have been able to leap tall goals in a single bound!

But unlike Marvel, WB panicked and didn't have bible who could right things in a reasonable way.

The switch to Joss Whedon made sense financially -- he had legitimately proven he can do a billion dollar SUperhero movie. The problem was he was brought in at the tail end rather than the beginning, and we all know it showed.
 
Morpheus 02 said:
But it seems like as soon as they were making Man of Steel, they immediately had plans for sequels , starting with B v S, with JUstice League seemingly as part of the plan .
It feels like they got caught off guard by the success of Avengers and that fast-tracked plans for a JL film ( if those plans even existed in the first place ). There's only one clue on screen in MoS that they were even thinking of Batman, and it's easy to miss.
 
It feels like they got caught off guard by the success of Avengers and that fast-tracked plans for a JL film ( if those plans even existed in the first place ). There's only one clue on screen in MoS that they were even thinking of Batman, and it's easy to miss.
Most armchair quarterbacks like us think that this is where it went wrong. That fast tracked the teamups way too fast.
 
Most armchair quarterbacks like us think that this is where it went wrong. That fast tracked the teamups way too fast.
There is probably some truth to that. In business, the fear of being left behind is strong. They want to make money, there is pressure to make money, so we have to run out and try to make money.

The idea that they can't do it as fast as they want would bite them, but if they didn't try with the tools they had, with very well know heroes (Batman and Superman probably more known that Iron Man) then they would fear missing out.

Patience is a virtue for a reason. Humans are not naturally patient.
 
Marvel Studios have five films, two featuring Iron Man, one Hulk, one Thor, and Captain America before they teamed up in The Avengers.
DC went straight for a team-up/confrontation between Superman and Batman in only Superman's second movie, throwing in Wonder Wonan to boot.
It really didn't give either character a chance to develop as such.
IMO you needed at least one more Superman solo movie before you have him face Batman. Even then, it should not have been a loose adaptation of 'The Dark Knight' - maybe something more akin to what John Byrne did in his Man of Steel mini series, a grudging respect for each other and their methods - possibly building towards antimony and a 'Dark Knight' confrontation in a later film.
 
Marvel Studios have five films, two featuring Iron Man, one Hulk, one Thor, and Captain America before they teamed up in The Avengers.
DC went straight for a team-up/confrontation between Superman and Batman in only Superman's second movie, throwing in Wonder Wonan to boot.
It really didn't give either character a chance to develop as such.
IMO you needed at least one more Superman solo movie before you have him face Batman. Even then, it should not have been a loose adaptation of 'The Dark Knight' - maybe something more akin to what John Byrne did in his Man of Steel mini series, a grudging respect for each other and their methods - possibly building towards antimony and a 'Dark Knight' confrontation in a later film.

I agree that the whole slate was rushed -- the first Superman movie deconstructed the mythos that hadn't even been constructed yet, and the second Superman movie killed its hero. But I've never been convinced by the argument that you can't make a team movie work without individual movies first. Look at X-Men, the movie that started the modern superhero boom. Look at The Incredibles or Mystery Men or Buckaroo Banzai. Look at the entire Power Rangers franchise and the Super Sentai franchise it spun off from. Beyond superheroes, look at Seven Samurai/The Magnificent Seven or Ocean's Eleven or the Fast and Furious franchise.

I've always found it misguided to argue that just because Marvel did something a certain way, that means DC should be obligated to do exactly the same. Wouldn't it make more sense to embrace doing it differently, to offer a contrast rather than an imitation? I can see the value of starting with a team film to introduce the characters and the world and then spinning off solo films. I see no reason in principle why it couldn't work. A single unsuccessful attempt doesn't mean it can never be done.
 
I agree that the whole slate was rushed -- the first Superman movie deconstructed the mythos that hadn't even been constructed yet, and the second Superman movie killed its hero. But I've never been convinced by the argument that you can't make a team movie work without individual movies first. Look at X-Men, the movie that started the modern superhero boom. Look at The Incredibles or Mystery Men or Buckaroo Banzai. Look at the entire Power Rangers franchise and the Super Sentai franchise it spun off from. Beyond superheroes, look at Seven Samurai/The Magnificent Seven or Ocean's Eleven or the Fast and Furious franchise.

I've always found it misguided to argue that just because Marvel did something a certain way, that means DC should be obligated to do exactly the same. Wouldn't it make more sense to embrace doing it differently, to offer a contrast rather than an imitation? I can see the value of starting with a team film to introduce the characters and the world and then spinning off solo films. I see no reason in principle why it couldn't work. A single unsuccessful attempt doesn't mean it can never be done.
I'm sure someone could make it work, but wb didn't.
 
DarrenTR1970 said:
Even then, it should not have been a loose adaptation of 'The Dark Knight
I think you mean Part 4 of The Dark Knight Returns ( as opposed to The Dark Knight, which does not feature Superman at all ).
 
Cross posting from Echo thread.

In the opinion of long time Marvel Producer Brad Winderbaum, the shows produced for Netflix are indeed canon in the "sacred timeline". He said that the studio was previously "cagey" on the subject due to the fact that they were unsure if what was established on Netflix would fit in with their own plans. But after seeing "how well the stories integrate", he no longer has such concerns.

https://screenrant.com/netflix-dare...medium=Social-Distribution&utm_source=Twitter
 
And unlike what @TREK_GOD_1 portrays in his messages, not every critic of the DCFU, and especially Zack Snyder, hates everything about his movies

Too many posts in the DC movies thread prove you incorrect. Some were posting rattled crap that fit the "_______my childhood" screaming to the letter, while others constantly made unsubstantiated judgements about Snyder as a person / personal life. That's how unhinged too many of those posts were.
 
Cross posting from Echo thread.

In the opinion of long time Marvel Producer Brad Winderbaum, the shows produced for Netflix are indeed canon in the "sacred timeline". He said that the studio was previously "cagey" on the subject due to the fact that they were unsure if what was established on Netflix would fit in with their own plans. But after seeing "how well the stories integrate", he no longer has such concerns.

https://screenrant.com/netflix-dare...medium=Social-Distribution&utm_source=Twitter

Well technically he says Daredevil is now obviously he appears in other shows but I'm not sure that holds them to everything that happens in them...
 
Well technically he says Daredevil is now obviously he appears in other shows but I'm not sure that holds them to everything that happens in them...
Well, this trailer that just released uses footage from Netflix and even specifically calls back to some of that show's most gruesome scenes.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Well technically he says Daredevil is now obviously he appears in other shows but I'm not sure that holds them to everything that happens in them...
It shows some of the brutalist scenes from the show, including Fisk beheading a guy with a car door and killing his father with a hammer.

If they're not toning that done I'll be surprised by stuff being charged.
 
It shows some of the brutalist scenes from the show, including Fisk beheading a guy with a car door and killing his father with a hammer.

If they're not toning that done I'll be surprised by stuff being charged.
They already said that Echo will be an R-rated type of show, so there is no need to tone anything down. Great news! Having a variety of shows for all age groups is a great move. I am super excited that the Netflix shows might be officially brought into continuity now!
 
Cross posting from Echo thread.

In the opinion of long time Marvel Producer Brad Winderbaum, the shows produced for Netflix are indeed canon in the "sacred timeline". He said that the studio was previously "cagey" on the subject due to the fact that they were unsure if what was established on Netflix would fit in with their own plans. But after seeing "how well the stories integrate", he no longer has such concerns.

https://screenrant.com/netflix-dare...medium=Social-Distribution&utm_source=Twitter
Just how myopic does it make me that my main takeaway from that statement is: "so you're saying there's hope for 'Agents of SHIELD' characters showing up?" (Yes yes, I know Mr Jarvis already made it in as the first AoS adjacent character in the mainline canon; you know which ones I mean damnit! ;) )
 
Well, this trailer that just released uses footage from Netflix and even specifically calls back to some of that show's most gruesome scenes.
Sure but my point was that Daredevil “the show” is but I’m not sure that holds them to everything e.g. if they want another go at Iron Fist I suspect they forget most of that…
 
Sure but my point was that Daredevil “the show” is but I’m not sure that holds them to everything e.g. if they want another go at Iron Fist I suspect they forget most of that…
Ah. Gotcha. Well, I figure "in for a penny, in for a pound", eh? Its not like we can just pick up with any of these characters right where they left off. In-universe, its been well over 10 years since we last saw these characters. If they're presented a little differently, well, time changes things.

What I would really like to see is Luke and Jessica married and attempting to raise their daughter in the crazy world they're a part of. I would only want Iron Fist involved as the second half of "Power Man and ..."
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top