Spoilers The Marvels grade and discussion

Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by The Nth Doctor, Nov 6, 2023.

?

How do you rate The Marvels?

  1. A+

    1.6%
  2. A

    15.9%
  3. A-

    23.8%
  4. B+

    25.4%
  5. B

    6.3%
  6. B-

    6.3%
  7. C+

    9.5%
  8. C

    1.6%
  9. C-

    7.9%
  10. D+

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  11. D

    1.6%
  12. D-

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  13. F

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. urbandefault

    urbandefault Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2013
    Location:
    Sickbay, dammit.
    Iger's comment sounds like a bullshit excuse to me, trying to cover his ass with the shareholders.

    I liked the movie. It was a good Sunday matinee: not too long, not too short.

    As far as I'm concerned, people who didn't like it can pound sand. :techman:
     
  2. Turtletrekker

    Turtletrekker Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2003
    Location:
    Tacoma, Washington
    Maybe you just didn't want to see it?
     
    The Nth Doctor and Anwar like this.
  3. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    That's his job.
     
  4. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    I do want to see it — I'm gonna see it — on Disney+. I already said I don't want to see pretty much anything in movie theaters, anymore.

    But the fact that there are far fewer people than expected actually seeing it in the theater is all the evidence that's needed to conclude that there are many more people than expected who didn't want to see it in the theater. It's just not what people want to see in theaters at that level of turn out. I don't even understand why that's debatable.

    As already discussed, the reasons why go way beyond anything to do specifically with this film in particular. Under-performance seems to be an industry wide problem. Interestingly, the hits have been new properties, not continuations.
     
    Commander Troi likes this.
  5. David cgc

    David cgc Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Location:
    Florida
    "If only there had been more executives looking over my shoulder while I worked," said no one, ever.
     
  6. Guy Gardener

    Guy Gardener Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    Location:
    In the lap of squalor I assure you.
    The only way this movie could have made money is with a better name.

    "Avengers: The Marvels." Maybe?
     
  7. Anwar

    Anwar Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Location:
    Moncton, NB
    That's the same empty excuse that was hurled at Guardians back in 2013 and Shang Chi in 2020...

    ...And Peacemaker over at DC.
     
  8. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    What a load of crap. Guardians of the Galaxy made over $700 billion. The Marvels hasn't even cracked $200 billion.

    Mine is a statement about the number of butts in seats, nothing more. It's not a comment on how good of a film it is.
     
    TREK_GOD_1 likes this.
  9. TREK_GOD_1

    TREK_GOD_1 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Location:
    Escaped from Delta Vega
    No. Rather than admitting a film is--apparently--terrible, with a plot and characters a significant amount of the movie going audience did not want to see / care about, some will employ mental gymnastics / endless excuses.

    Well, there's the theory suggesting the first Captain Marvel only succeeded because it was strategically released before Avengers: Endgame to make audiences believe there was a direct connection to the film (i.e.,something which might be relevant to the final Avengers movie of the Thanos arc), so perhaps using your title would have helped to some degree?
     
    Guy Gardener likes this.
  10. Anwar

    Anwar Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Location:
    Moncton, NB
    https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://i.redd.it/y05ouxth88h81.jpg

    What's your answer as to why Martin Scorsese's last movie didn't have many go to see it?
     
  11. Anwar

    Anwar Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Location:
    Moncton, NB
    By that logic, Captain America: First Avenger and Thor shouldn't have done well. Nor Guardians or Shang Chi.

    Fight Club and Blade Runner shouldn't have bombed either
     
  12. M'rk son of Mogh

    M'rk son of Mogh Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    A film can be not terrible (such as this one) and make no money at the same time.

    Nothing has to be admitted about the quality one way or another when that's not even questioned before anyone even decides to avoid it opening night.
     
  13. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    Martin Scorsese's films aren't on topic here.

    Exactly.

    I have no opinion as to whether this film is good or bad, as I have not seen it. I'm looking forward to it, though. I enjoyed Captain Marvel, Ms. Marvel, and WandaVision. It's encouraging that the majority of people who've seen it and opined about it seem to have liked it.
     
  14. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    Which is why the box office metric is a nonsensical one to me. Why not watch and enjoy it?

    Since the money doesn't impact our enjoyment, since we are not the beneficiaries of the money, I see no reason to put that up on the pedestal it so often is.
     
    Commander Troi likes this.
  15. Guy Gardener

    Guy Gardener Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    Location:
    In the lap of squalor I assure you.
    Money determines sequels.
     
  16. Grendelsbayne

    Grendelsbayne Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Location:
    Netherlands
    It's not that clear-cut, really. Mario and Barbie are 'new properties' only in the way that The Batman or Joker were new properties. Oppenheimer almost certainly owes a major cut of its box office to Barbenheimer. Maverick and Avatar were straight sequels, as were Spider-man, Dr. Strange, Black Panther and GotG. Spiderverse, Creed and John Wick, too.

    Meanwhile plenty of actual new properties like Black Adam, Blue Beetle, The Creator, Wish, etc, are in the same boat as MI, Indiana Jones, Ant-man, Flash and Captain Marvel.

    I genuinely think simply 'Captain Marvel 2' would have led to at least somewhat better results. At this point it seems people are less inclined than ever to give a shot to a new superhero they don't already know, but can be convinced to show up - albeit perhaps in fewer numbers than the past - for someone they know. That should've worked in favor of this film but clearly didn't and it makes me wonder how many people actually viewed this as a new Captain Marvel movie rather than as another brand new marvel property that happened to have a familiar face or two in it.
     
  17. JoeZhang

    JoeZhang Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    It was called Captain Marvel 2 in many overseas markets - it still died on contact with the box office.
     
  18. YLu

    YLu Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Of course he wouldn't. That'd be admitting that labor actually has power and is important.
     
  19. Anwar

    Anwar Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Location:
    Moncton, NB
    If you mean China, they would've been offended by Monica and Kamala.
     
  20. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    And that's relevant to your day-to-day life...how?