Are MCU solo franchises necessary for all heroes?

[spideymouse]

Thanks for all the feedback, everyone! Given that you'd like to see a LOT of these movies made, would you try to fit them into Marvel Studios' current "two films per year" schedule, or would you start to cram three or four per year in order to accommodate the necessary continuation of the Avengers franchise? I don't know if you want to allow 5+ years between Avengers sequels.

I guess this really does beg the question that has been posed in other threads, and that is how much oversaturation is an issue, and how strategic Marvel can be as they both introduce new characters/teams while continuing 3+ solo franchises (IM, Cap, Thor) AND the Avengers franchise. That's a TON of movies to plan, produce, and release.

[Abudefduf]

Not at all. You just need a good screewriter/director (plus good actors) that can give personality and depth to the new characters without needing an origin/backstory solo movie. It can be done, you just need the right people.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by spideymouse

Thanks for all the feedback, everyone! Given that you'd like to see a LOT of these movies made, would you try to fit them into Marvel Studios' current "two films per year" schedule, or would you start to cram three or four per year in order to accommodate the necessary continuation of the Avengers franchise? I don't know if you want to allow 5+ years between Avengers sequels.

I guess this really does beg the question that has been posed in other threads, and that is how much oversaturation is an issue, and how strategic Marvel can be as they both introduce new characters/teams while continuing 3+ solo franchises (IM, Cap, Thor) AND the Avengers franchise. That's a TON of movies to plan, produce, and release.

Which is why I keep going back to this: why THE hell doesn't Marvel start looking at live-action TV? Comic books are MADE for TV....they've got the same episodic content that allows for cliffhangers, the introduction of lots and lots of characters with ample time for development, etc.

A few months ago, they *were* actually talking a *lot* about developing TV franchises --- Guillermo del Toro's Hulk series, the Alias Jessica Jones series, Mockingbird, Cloak & Dagger, maybe one or two others that escape me right now.....and then they went and cancelled all development on pretty much everything except Hulk, which is still at least a year away from a pilot.

[spideymouse]

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

Which is why I keep going back to this: why THE hell doesn't Marvel start looking at live-action TV?

Because their Head of Television is a total f**king idiot.

[Destructus86]

Originally Posted by spideymouse

Because their Head of Television is a total f**king idiot.

True....true...

I imagine him sitting by his diamond studded swimming pool drooling with lackluster ideas...

[JB-the-Hunter]

Originally Posted by Destructus86

True....true...

I imagine him sitting by his diamond studded swimming pool drooling with lackluster ideas...

What ideas? LOL

[OB12]

Which is why I keep going back to this: why THE hell doesn't Marvel start looking at live-action TV? Comic books are MADE for TV....they've got the same episodic content that allows for cliffhangers, the introduction of lots and lots of characters with ample time for development, etc.

A few months ago, they *were* actually talking a *lot* about developing TV franchises --- Guillermo del Toro's Hulk series, the Alias Jessica Jones series, Mockingbird, Cloak & Dagger, maybe one or two others that escape me right now.....and then they went and cancelled all development on pretty much everything except Hulk, which is still at least a year away from a pilot.

Seriously, a Heroes for Hire TV show set within the MCU would be all kinds of awesome. The SFX required for the show wouldn't be so out there that it would stretch the budget for TV like Hulk would be. It is almost like a buddy cop show with powers, which would play pretty well with audiences because you could have self-contained episodes but also longer seasonal arcs as well. This show was meant to be on televsion.

[Chewy]

Heroes for Hire is THE show they should be focusing on. Nothing else comes close to being as perfect for the format as HfH. Concept that is perfect for hour-long episodes that can build a larger overall arc, powers that are doable on a TV budget, popular characters to star, good supporting cast (Daughters of the Dragon, Jessica Jones, etc). They can even set it in the MCU without stepping on any toes.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Heroes for Hire is THE show they should be focusing on. Nothing else comes close to being as perfect for the format as HfH. Concept that is perfect for hour-long episodes that can build a larger overall arc, powers that are doable on a TV budget, popular characters to star, good supporting cast (Daughters of the Dragon, Jessica Jones, etc). They can even set it in the MCU without stepping on any toes.

Absolutely.
HFH: The Series is an absolute no-brainer. And loosely tie it in with the MCU....not necessarily any cameos from the existing movies (although that would be the shiz), but references to them, like the existence of SHIELD and the Avengers.

[spideymouse]

Originally Posted by JB-the-Hunter

What ideas? LOL

The completely ridiculous idea that kids do not have the mental capacity/attention span to follow a television SERIES with any type of ongoing continuity between episodes (even though Marvel just achieved the unthinkable in tying 6--and counting--full-length movies together), resulting in 1) the cancellation of arguably Marvel's three best-ever animated series; 2) the exodus of several long-time great Marvel animation creative team members, and 3) the consequent dip in quality of their current shows.

[Insert yet another thing to complain about] The Ultimate Spider-Man series...

Ultimates 3.

Ugh, I'm so angry. Let's get back on topic.

[DrCosmic]

Originally Posted by spideymouse

Thanks for all the feedback, everyone! Given that you'd like to see a LOT of these movies made, would you try to fit them into Marvel Studios' current "two films per year" schedule, or would you start to cram three or four per year in order to accommodate the necessary continuation of the Avengers franchise? I don't know if you want to allow 5+ years between Avengers sequels.

I guess this really does beg the question that has been posed in other threads, and that is how much oversaturation is an issue, and how strategic Marvel can be as they both introduce new characters/teams while continuing 3+ solo franchises (IM, Cap, Thor) AND the Avengers franchise. That's a TON of movies to plan, produce, and release.

Oversaturation is really only an issue because other studios are also releasing superhero movies, some at an increased pace due to the Avengers' success. I mean, in 2014 we have Cap 2, Amazing Spidey 2 and [Black Panther?] all within a six week span.

That said, some films can be in off peak times. if you have a April movie, a July movie and a November movie, there's no danger doing three movies a year. Even if WB has a DC film coming out and Fox or Sony have one of theirs coming as well.

So that's what I suggest, definitely only two Avengers-affiliated movies a year, but nothing wrong with releasing something potentially smaller at a different time.

[spideymouse]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

Oversaturation is really only an issue because other studios are also releasing superhero movies, some at an increased pace due to the Avengers' success. I mean, in 2014 we have Cap 2, Amazing Spidey 2 and [Black Panther?] all within a six week span.

That said, some films can be in off peak times. if you have a April movie, a July movie and a November movie, there's no danger doing three movies a year. Even if WB has a DC film coming out and Fox or Sony have one of theirs coming as well.

So that's what I suggest, definitely only two Avengers-affiliated movies a year, but nothing wrong with releasing something potentially smaller at a different time.

That looks to be what they're moving towards with Thor 2 in November and Cap 2 in April... spreading them across the calendar a lot more, though that untitled 2014 Marvel movie is still slated for May 16, 2014.

How many new solo character movies would you want for Phase II before Avengers 2? Given that you have IM3, Thor 2 and Cap 2 already slated, would you want just one more new solo film before Avengers 2, or maybe three or so more?