• 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
I think some people need to remember that there can be a wide gulf between "box office disappointment" and "box office failure". Studios can sometimes (more often than ever, recently) have some very unrealistic expectations. It's not a fault of a movie if the suits loose touch with reality even more than usual.

Also keep in mind that some of the all time best, most adored and critically acclaimed movies ever, were box office flops, bombs, panned by critics, and "disappointments" on release, while the vast majority of top earners and award winners have quickly faded from most people's memory. Time always tells.
 
Last edited:
I think some people need to remember that there can be a wide gulf between "box office disappointment" and "box office failure". Studios can sometimes (more often recently than ever) have some very unrealistic expectations. It's not a fault of a movie if they suits loose touch with reality even more than usual.

Also keep in mind that some of the all time best, most adored and critically acclaimed movies ever, were box office flops, bombs, panned by critics, and "disappointments" on release, while the vast majority of top earners and award winners have quickly faded from most people's memory. Time always tells.
Exactly. Cult classics exist for a reason (of which there are many!), even for films that shouldn't even been considered a cult classic.
 
So something i think we can all agree is relevant to all of us wh3o plan on viewing the film. Is 2D IMAX good enough, or should it be 3D IMAX?
 
I think some people need to remember that there can be a wide gulf between "box office disappointment" and "box office failure". Studios can sometimes (more often recently than ever) have some very unrealistic expectations. It's not a fault of a movie if they suits loose touch with reality even more than usual.

Also keep in mind that some of the all time best, most adored and critically acclaimed movies ever, were box office flops, bombs, panned by critics, and "disappointments" on release, while the vast majority of top earners and award winners have quickly faded from most people's memory. Time always tells.

Yeah, TBH DC wishes it could have had the "failures" at the box office that Marvel has had over the last year.
 
Is it just me, or has Fury not really done anything interesting on-screen since making Coulson SHIELD's director in the AoS S1 finale? He didn't contribute much to Ultron, or any of the movies/stories since. (Not counting CM1, as it's a prequel, but that movie didn't do the character any favors, either.) Life's too short to waste on Secret Invasion, but I get the impression he didn't do much there, either.

The whole point of the character was twofold: one, to assemble Avengers, and two, while he's ultimately trustworthy, his methods may not always be ethically clean. Now he's retired from recruiting heroes, and doesn't seem to be in a position to make tough choices - De Fontaine has taken over that role. So... he's just a kindly, affable grandpa figure now? :vulcan:
 
The whole point of the character was twofold: one, to assemble Avengers, and two, while he's ultimately trustworthy, his methods may not always be ethically clean. Now he's retired from recruiting heroes, and doesn't seem to be in a position to make tough choices - De Fontaine has taken over that role. So... he's just a kindly, affable grandpa figure now? :vulcan:

He's certainly not the MCU's big mover and shaker from the earlier years. Now, Fury seems to just be in projects because Sam Jackson is The Star Named Sam Jackson (and last anchor to the MCU's origins).
 
He didn't contribute much to Ultron, or any of the movies/stories since.

There was the hellicarrier that he had ordered Coulson to acquire, which became very convenient in "Age of Ultron".


Now he's retired from recruiting heroes, and doesn't seem to be in a position to make tough choices - De Fontaine has taken over that role.

Oh God. I really loathe her. And why was she willing to orchestrate a hit on Clint Barton for Eleanor Bishop? And why did she lie to Yelena Belova about how Natasha Romanoff had died?
 
There was the hellicarrier that he had ordered Coulson to acquire, which became very convenient in "Age of Ultron".
True. I guess I forgot/left that out because it didn't seem to affect the feel of the movie much; it was more of a narrative grace note.

Oh God. I really loathe her. And why was she willing to orchestrate a hit on Clint Barton for Eleanor Bishop? And why did she lie to Yelena Belova about how Natasha Romanoff had died?
Good questions.

What's wrong with being just a kindly, affable grandpa figure?
In the context of a silly adventure romp mainly aimed at kids? Nothing, necessarily. But making this particular character into that sort of character risks alienating the action fans that still make up the backbone of the franchise's audience.
 
Oh God. I really loathe her. And why was she willing to orchestrate a hit on Clint Barton for Eleanor Bishop? And why did she lie to Yelena Belova about how Natasha Romanoff had died?

Eleanor went to Fisk to ask him to eliminate Hawkeye, Fisk called Valentina because she a Handler for assassins. Valentina had Yelena working for her for a while and wanted to see if she had what it took to take on a major target like Clint Barton. If it worked, then Clints dead and the contract is fulfilled. If Yelena failed, then she wasn't as good as Valentina thought she was and she's down one incompetent assassin. Win-Win.
 
Tbh it's kind of hard to see Fontaine as this horrible villain when many mcu characters worked as assassins
 
After watching and reading some of the promotional stuff for The Marvels, I think I understand why they changed Kamala/Ms. Marvel's powers. It looks like they wanted her powers to be connected to Carol/Capt. Marvels so they could do the whole thing with them and Monica/Photon (or whatever they're using for her superhero name) switching places when they use their powers.
 
After watching and reading some of the promotional stuff for The Marvels, I think I understand why they changed Kamala/Ms. Marvel's powers. It looks like they wanted her powers to be connected to Carol/Capt. Marvels so they could do the whole thing with them and Monica/Photon (or whatever they're using for her superhero name) switching places when they use their powers.

Probably. I still liked her comics powers though more
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top