7 films for Phase 3 What Will the be?

Discussion in 'Marvel Films' started by Dasher10, Aug 27, 2013.

  1. DrCosmic

    DrCosmic Professor of Power

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,664
    Likes Received:
    1
    They certainly can. I'm just looking for some reason other than being female. Wasp's shrinking story is better explored by Ant-Man. Scarlet Witch's magic motif is better explored by Dr. Strange. I haven't come up with an additional reason, and I think movies should be made primarily to entertain.
     
    #151
  2. Loki882

    Loki882 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    21,080
    Likes Received:
    26
    Why is Ant Man automatically better at exploring shrinking than Wasp? Why is Doctor Strange better for exploring magic than Scarlet Witch? You makes those claims, but give no actual reasons or evidence to back it up.
     
    #152
  3. TheJediBrah

    TheJediBrah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because they're women? It's harder to believe/enjoy superhero movies starring women, they won't make as much money and hence the studio isn't going to waste a slot that will make more profit with a male-centric film.

    Pretty simple.
     
    #153
  4. DrCosmic

    DrCosmic Professor of Power

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,664
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, Dr. Strange has an extensive supporting cast and years of solo stories all dedicated to exploring a magical corner of the universe. Ant-Man's origin story stands on its own, without additional characters. I honestly thought these points were obvious.
     
    #154
  5. Chewy

    Chewy REDACTED

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    13,000
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well we'd have to see a female superhero movie before we can conclude they don't make as much money, wouldn't we? :o


    (And don't bring up Elektra and Catwoman, those are two of the worst superhero movies. Possibly the two worst superhero movies)
     
    #155
  6. blalex620

    blalex620 Comics, Books, Games

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    750
    Likes Received:
    0
    I highly, Highly doubt we'll see Falcon, War Machine, Sif and the Warriors Three, and Bucky in Avengers 3. Those are all supporting characters for their respective series and won't be showing up in an Avengers movie. Whedon's basically said that's why they didn't show up in Avengers and won't show up in Avengers 2. I doubt he'll change his mind for A3 when he has to add a lot more important characters to the story than supporting cast. And that doesn't negate Spider-Man showing up.
     
    #156
  7. TheJediBrah

    TheJediBrah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm just answering the question accurately.

    And anyhow Elektra and Catwoman are perfect examples, for whatever reason they are female superheroes, and the movies sucked. You can claim it was a coincidence (I think it probably was) but the correlation is still there.
     
    #157
  8. Loki882

    Loki882 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    21,080
    Likes Received:
    26
    No, the correlation should be crappy movie+poor marketing=bomb. It has nothing to do with them being women, studios are stupid for thinking that. How is it that we can have dozens of MALE led superhero movies bomb, and hundreds if not thousands of male led actions movies, yet Hollywood never seems to conclude that there's no audience for them? By contrast, a couple of female ones do badly because they weren't good, and all of a sudden the GA won't support female action/superhero movies, I smell a double standard.
     
    #158
  9. xeno000

    xeno000 IRON MAN WAS RIGHT!

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    8,430
    Likes Received:
    11

    The typical attitude at studios is that if a few films in a genre fail, execs assume that the problem is the genre and not the quality of those particular films. The fact that Elektra and Catwoman were awful films that never should have been made is overlooked.


    This is especially ridiculous when you consider the action films with female leads that have done well. The original Aliens series is the perfect case in point, with Sigourney Weaver's Ellen Ripley heading up one of the most intense -- and successful -- action franchises to date. Currently The Hunger Games is filling the action/adventure/scifi niche with a strong female lead. There have been other attempts, mostly from the YA/scifi angle, but the studios producing comic book movies haven't attempted to tap into that very lucrative market.


    Marvel Studios has several female characters who could be transitioned to either lead solo films or team franchises. Ms. Marvel is the obvious possibility, but Black Widow might be given a shot if CATWS raises her profile enough. A few years ago Marvel even commissioned a BW script that wasn't produced, so she's been looked at as a lead. Peggy Carter seems to be under serious consideration for at least more One Shots or a retro TV show tied to Agents of SHIELD. Crystal and her sister Medusa are also strong females who would be at the forefront of an Inhumans film. After Doctor Strange is introduced The Defenders is an obvious team to develop. Perhaps the Valkyrie and her human alter ego will become prominent in that film as she was in the comic book.


    Spider-Woman is unlikely because of Spider-Man. It's just too close for comfort. And She-Hulk probably isn't going to emerge from the comics, though Jennifer Walters might. Some characters are a bit too strange and/or derivative to make the transition in their original form.
     
    #159
  10. TheJediBrah

    TheJediBrah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes I'm sure you know better than them and all the different studios have no idea what they are doing.

    Honestly I can't even think of a female superhero that I would bother seeing a film about. And much of the population is the same. It's not sexist, it's just the way it is. Deal with it.
     
    #160
  11. DrCosmic

    DrCosmic Professor of Power

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,664
    Likes Received:
    1
    The problem with a correlation is that you either have to call it all a coincidence or find the cause. After many attempts to make successful female action films, and only mild successes, it's not silly to see a pattern. Perhaps a better question to ask is: why do people keep making bad female action movies? Aeon Flux, Barb Wire, Tank Girl... even Supergirl from the Reeve days. Why? Coincidence? Can you convince someone that it's coincidence not worth mentioning? So well that they'll put down $150M? That this time it will just be different, that this movie will be good and successful unlike those... because all of those otherwise successful filmmakers and actresses who tried to make good movies were just incompetent? Or is there a cause that should be addressed?

    Even with a good director and story and the great Angelina Jolie at the forefront movies like Salt and Tomb Raider, moderate success... but as soon as you add a male hero, you get runaway success like Mr. and Mrs. Smith.

    Hunger Games is based around a love story, and Alien is based around a horror storyline, two genres that have been popular with and for women since their inceptions... and both have very limited amounts of action, in which the heroine is not very capable (but very lucky and resourceful) during their first outing.

    If you look at the successful female action properties you'll notice a few commonalities. Any successful ones are moderately successful, no runaway successes making $300M+, except for the film with a large built in audience - not just broad familiarity, but millions of young people who are currently spending money on the franchise whether the film comes out or not. A white hot adaptation doesn't disprove the correlation, it just gives one solution: if you adapt something a bunch of people are already buying, they will buy your movie too. Agreed.

    Not only are they otherwise moderate successes, but the successful ones have a very strong male action hero presence or a team dynamic. That's why you can't use Terminator and Underworld to support a Captain Marvel film... unless you expect Mar-Vell to play as large a role as T800 and Hybrid Boy did. (Which, in Ms. Marvel's case, wouldn't at all be bad, would it?). Same with Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. And a slightly less Wolvie-centric cut of X-Men 1. You can have the female as the central character even if she's not the most powerful hero, even if she doesn't actually have the final fight, maybe only the finishing move. Is that what you guys would want from a Ms. Marvel film? Or a Scarlet Witch film? The male hero to take center stage at crucial points? Imagine if Pepper had single handedly taken out Stane IM3 style at the end of IM1... would Tony have felt like the hero? If not, then lets not use these franchises as examples of female-led action movies, since they are so very shared, like Mr. and Mrs. Smith, or even CATWS (for Black Widow).

    Even these woman-badarse-on-a-team-that-slowly-disappears franchises, like Alien or Resident Evil, they have strong male action heroes, that are equal and sometimes superior to the female hero until the last third of the film. Hunger Games also gave Katniss a strong male team.

    You'll also notice a lot of these successful female franchises have some stereotypically female motivation involved: a child to protect (or avenge?) or a romance that strongly influences their story and motivation.

    And then you have to wonder why these low budget action-only female films like Ultraviolet and Kill Bill and Resident Evil are the most consistently successful female action films. Is it because the audience needed for success is small? Is this the route we'd want for a female superhero film? A $30M budget in an off-season release with action as the main focus and character as a minor event? Would we call that a successful superheroine movie? Is there a beloved character that that kind of film would adequately capture? Would people feel gipped or that Marvel was sexist for following this proven formula for making successful female action films?

    These are not rhetorical questions, nor are they just for xeno.

    We live in a world of cause and effect. It's one thing to say the cause can't be changed, but nothing is 'just the way it is.' You don't find it strange that out of all the female heroes in the history of comicdom not *one* of them strikes your fancy? You don't think gender bias, a historical fact, has played any role in that whatsoever? That's is just... a coincidence?
     
    #161
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
  12. Loki882

    Loki882 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    21,080
    Likes Received:
    26
    Yes, you're not sexist, but wouldn't even consider seeing a female superhero movie, Riight. Also, starting you're statement with "I'm not sexist" kind of proves that you are. Your a sexist and an *******, deal with it. Also, how many male led superhero movies have bombed, yet they keep making more, sorry your argument fails right there.
     
    #162
  13. Loki882

    Loki882 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    21,080
    Likes Received:
    26
    These are not rhetorical questions, nor are they just for xeno.
    How many male led action movies have bombed, how many male led superhero movies have bombed, yet they keep making more. Your argument falls apart right there. If you use the cause and effect argument, then there should be no male superhero movies either. Sorry, don't buy that argument. also, Ripley and Katniss were plenty capable and THEY were the stars of those franchises, the males were clearly support. Also, THG is not simply a love story, to argue that is wrong.
    There aren't many female action movies because studios REFUSE to make them, so a few bomb because they're bad, then they refuse to make more, then use those few to justify not making more, that's some grade A BS right there.
     
    #163
  14. childeroland

    childeroland Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    6,061
    Likes Received:
    2
    Plenty of male-led action films fail, yet the actors' gender is not blamed. Why should it be different for women? Especially since far more male-led action films are made than female-led action films?
     
    #164
  15. Loki882

    Loki882 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    21,080
    Likes Received:
    26
    Exactly, you and I agree completely. That is the one argument that people on the other side cannot easily refute. You can't say that female action movies won't sell if you don't make many of them and don't put much effort into the one's that you do make.
     
    #165
  16. blalex620

    blalex620 Comics, Books, Games

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    750
    Likes Received:
    0
    People (not you guys) cite Elektra and Catwoman as why females superhero movies won't do good but fail to realize those movies were just horrible and had no amount of care put into them at all. Jennifer Gardner has said she's ashamed of Elektra because she realized it was terribly made and Halle Berry accepted the Razzie for Catwoman herself. She knew the film was terrible too. And both of these actresses are great actresses.
    Two female superheros movies were made that bombed. Green Lantern, Daredevil (the theatrical cut), Ghost Rider (#2 more than #1), Spider-Man 3, Batman and Robin were all terrible movies all male led but no one considers that because of their gender. These studios need to realize movies don't suck based on gender a majority of the time, they just suck.

    Why is it WB have so much trouble getting a WW film or TV show made but can make a Flash TV show? I'd argue WW should be easy. An Amazonian princess placed in the real world in a fish outta water scenario who has superpowers and wants to be a hero. Seriously, what's so hard about that?
     
    #166
  17. Lord

    Lord All Mighty

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    Messages:
    15,505
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, let me quote that in my signature, one simple but difficult to refute statement
     
    #167
  18. DrCosmic

    DrCosmic Professor of Power

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,664
    Likes Received:
    1
    My argument doesn't fall apart, because it's about correlation not cause and effect. Correlation means when one happens the other happens. When a female superhero movie happens, it is a bad movie. That's historically true. When a male superhero movie happens, it may be a bad movie, it may not be. So there's no correlation.

    Studios don't refuse to make them. They make them, put good talent on them, and they suck. Unless someone figures out WHY they suck, there's no point in just trying again.

    Katniss' arc is driven by her relationship with Peetah, and her mastery of that relationship serves as the context and empowerment to 'defeat' the Hunger Games. In the film, she was strong willed, but clearly no match for anyone in single combat. Ripley even worse so, her team beat Ash for her, and her crowning moment of awesome was firing a grappling hook, working controls. Resourceful underdog with strong vital life saving relationships with her supporting cast. Like Katniss. Like Selene. Like Sarah Connor. Not like a female superhero. These are the types of female action heroines that are popular, women who stand no chance of facing their foes one on one, who rely on their network, their relationships, to gain victory and then strike a final blow with their relatively modest combat abilities in what may be the film's only fight scene. Women who take no shame in having a man fight their battles for them, and wouldn't survive otherwise. The more powerful Ripley got, the worse and less popular her films were.

    Again, this is the idea of correlation, when you see bad movies have X in common and successful ones have Y in common, you realize that Y is part of the picture, even if you don't know why, exactly.

    Now if you want to go into Y, we can discuss that, but please at least address the argument before you dismiss it.

    Because there are a lot of male led action films that succeed, some wildly so. In fact, it's a notable exception when a male led action film really bombs.

    Well, there are male action movies that don't get much effort and do sell. If you look at the first five to ten male action movies, some of them do very well, so you have some evidence to see they sell. For female action movies, this is not true, so you have to ask... how many times do you have to try in order to find one that sells? How much money are you going to throw down that hole that clearly doesn't sell as well as the male action movie?

    As for effort... every single one was a passion project for both the director and the actress, so a lack of effort is not the issue. Perhaps you can say lack of money, and that's true, their budgets are lower than the modern male actioner. So are you saying that female action movies can only be successful with big budgets? Because this is not true of male action movies.

    Supergirl, Tank Girl, Aeon Flux... countless non-superhero female action movies. All bombed. They're not just looking at those two projects, those are just brought up most often because they were marketed well and made by solid directors and white hot actresses.

    Now you're telling me when people look at the male superhero bombs and decide to make a male one anyway, it's not because of all of the successful male superhero movies... it's just cuz they're male, and the success of Spider-Man 1 and 2 don't figure into making another Spider-Man movie... it's just cuz he's a male?

    If WW is "easy," (because if I can sum it up in a sentence, then it's easy to do well... rocket science, brain surgery... what's so hard about those?) then Flash is infinitely easier on every level, which means less time figuring out stuff and more time making it awesome.
     
    #168
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
  19. TheJediBrah

    TheJediBrah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    You need not take everything so literally. "just the way it is" doesn't literally mean "there is no reason", I just couldn't be bothered trying to explain why.

    A large part could be gender bias, it wouldn't surprise me. I'm not sure why I'm ending up in an argument, I was just explaining the obvious reasons why the studio doesn't want to make female-led superhero movies so much.

    I didn't say that lol

    *you're.

    And what argument do you think I'm trying to make?

    Go back and find someone else to have a pointless debate with, because trying to invent some issues with my post so that you can have some conflict is just sad and pathetic.

    Or say something sensible and we can have a mature discussion. Your choice.

    EDIT: After reading some your posts to other people it seems that you are just confused. I would advise in future for you to respond to what people actually are saying, and not what you anticipate people will say that you can argue with.
     
    #169
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
  20. blalex620

    blalex620 Comics, Books, Games

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    750
    Likes Received:
    0
    If WW is made and does good but WW two bombs, how likely are they to make a number 3 or even reboot the series in a few years? Not that likely if you ask me. Green Lantern bombed hard and yet, there's a good chance with all the rumors and speculation that we'll see a reboot of it. If that had been a female led movie that reboot probably wouldn't be happening.

    And you just took what I said and dumbed it down to the lowest level. Of course it's not easy to make any superhero work on TV or film but there are male superhero movies that are harder to make than a female movie.

    Wonder Woman: Amazonian princess who leaves her island to explore the outside world and decides to be a hero in a fish outta water story.

    Green Lantern: An ace pilot who inherits powers based on will from a dying alien who crash landed to Earth who is a part of an intergalatic space police force.

    Seriously, which one of those would be the easier sell. If Wonder Woman was a male her story would have been made. But because she's a woman for some reason it's so much harder to tell her story than someone like Green Lantern or Flash (who's story is arguably as easy to tell as WW) and definitely Aquaman's. WW is the easiest story to tell behind Batman and Superman for WB/DC yet they continue bulls***ing around claiming they haven't got the right script or it's so difficult to tell her story.

    It's not that female superhero's have harder stories to tell, it's just these studios don't take the pitches given to them and they don't try to commission screenplays for them. A Spider-Woman spy/espionage superhero flick could be epic, a Ms Marvel cosmic movie could be great too, a WW film done right would blow a lot of other superhero films out the water.

    All it takes is either WB or Marvel or hell even another studio adapting something not from the big two, to take a chance and make a great female hero movie and things could finally take off. But instead we have WB saying WW is hard and Marvel saying we don't have time right now instead of saying a female hero movie is a top priority of ours for Phase 3.
     
    #170
  21. TheJediBrah

    TheJediBrah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's just politics from the studios. I agree Wonder Woman would be easier to buy than Green Lantern, but the studios are just unwilling to take the risk.
     
    #171
  22. childeroland

    childeroland Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    6,061
    Likes Received:
    2
    Because a lot of them are made.
    That isn't true, unless we're talking a different definition of really bombing. In the past few years alone, we've had John Carter, The Lone Ranger, Jack the Giant Slayer, Green Lantern, White House Down, XXX: State of the Union, R.I.P.D. (how many chances is that for Ryan Reynolds, now?), After Earth, Parker, arguably Killer Elite, arguably The Mechanic. Those plus the number of other similar films which at least disappointed expectations are almost more male-dominated action movies made than there are total big budget female-led action films in the past few years period.
     
    #172
  23. blalex620

    blalex620 Comics, Books, Games

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    750
    Likes Received:
    0
    People overlook the good female action movies made in the past few years like Salt, Colombiana, Haywire, Hanna are the few I could think of off the top of my head. There hasn't even been as many bad female action movies as there have been male ones. Hell, they're even making a female expendables style film. The big two still worry that the superhero genre is still small enough that one or two bad films could ruin it and therefore won't take that risk.
     
    #173
  24. Loki882

    Loki882 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    21,080
    Likes Received:
    26
    Do you really want me to list the male action movies that have failed, because we'd be here for days and I still wouldn't come close to listing them all. The reason why more male action movies succeed is because A LOT of them are made, and some have real effort put into them. By contrast, the reason why only a certain number of female action movies have succeeded (and there are more than people think) is because very few of them are made, and fewer have actual effort put into them. So, it's a self-defeating attitude and that argument holds no water.
     
    #174
  25. Red Mask

    Red Mask Human Killing Machine

    Joined:
    May 21, 2003
    Messages:
    10,231
    Likes Received:
    0
    #175

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"