Originally Posted by Saitou Hajime
If you have bolded the rest of my reply instead of that one sentence, then you would see I have already refuted your flawed premise. Cap's standard of success is different from Wolverine's, and his sequel opportunities weren't as tied to his own solo efforts' success as Wolverine's is. Unlike Cap, Wolverine is the face of the highest grossing films of his franchise, and so for his own solo efforts to underperform is not a good sign. Like I said, if Iron Man only grossed 50+ million on OW, 200 million overall domestically and 400 million WW, the franchise wouldn't have been so successful. Or if the sequels themselves have similarly underperformed despite the first film's huge success, that too would have cut the legs from underneath the Avengers or its sequel.
Im not trying to get into any of that, thats why I did not bold the rest of your quote. I was strictly comparing the lowest grossing entry of a series, and how that does not exactly mean its a flop. I could have used any of the lowest grossing film in a Solo/sequel/spinnoff or whatever the hell in a franchise that still had successful numbers. Im not trying to point out any distinct similarities in bringing Wolverine, Iron Man or Cap to the screen or their success.
My point was comparing films box office is ********, when they still are making the studio's decent profit. Thats it. If I didn't make that clear I apologize.