Just How Important is This Movie?

[Aesop Rocks]

Personally I think Thor is the biggest movie of the pre-Avengers movies.

With the Cosmic Cube and Infinity Gauntlet in the movies, that opens a HUGE door.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Yeah, I'm a little worried that people are gonna get sick of superhero movies halfway through next summer.

Hopefully most of them will be sick of X-Men movies,because of X-Men:FC. t:

 

[ddddeeee]

At least Thor won't be losing out if they do get fed up since it's first.

I'm a little worried for Cap but couldn't care less for First Class.

 

[Ash Talon]

There's no way in hell that Thor makes $400 million domestic. Spider-Man barely did, and he's one of the most recognizable pop culture characters. Very few movies make $400 million domestic. Thor will not be one of them.

However, I think Thor has an edge over Green Lantern. Both have fanciful characters and feature otherworldy realms. However, Thor is going to have a lot of press tying it into Marvel's growing world of films. GL won't be related to the Batman film world in any way. Also, GL is just a bit goofier due to him having a magic ring. Ring vs hammer? I'll go with the hammer. Lastly, GL is going to have numerous CGI characters. I'll go with guys in costume over CGI creations any day. And I think the public will too.

On to this threads' original question. Thor's box-office and reception is important to the Avengers' reception. However, Avengers will be shooting and potentially have principal photography wrapped by the time Thor comes out in theaters. It's not like Avengers will be canned if Thor doesn't live up to hopes and hype.

I think Cap will be even more interesting in terms of acceptance. People are overplaying how the name "America" will play overseas. It's a period piece set during the most popular (in terms of interest) war. Yes, it'll fit the superhero mold, but it also has a toe in the historic realm. This could be very helpful in setting it apart from the norm. And Cap is not going to be leader of the Avengers in the film. Fury is the leader. Iron Man/Tony Stark will likely have a far more important role in the film and likely be considered the leader. Maybe they'll be vying for leadership. I wouldn't expect Cap to automatically be the leader.

I think Thor and Captain America will each bring in about $200-250 million, but likely be in the low 200s domestically. They'll have openings of around $70+. I don't think either will near $100 million opening week, unless they have some incredible trailers and promotions. Marvel did well with promoting Iron Man, so maybe they'll be able to do wonders with Thor and Cap, too.


BTW, Iron Man, Cap, and Thor have always been my top 3 superheroes. I've read their comics for 30+ years. I'm hoping Thor and Cap join IM in popularity with the public. I'm also a skeptic, though. And realize they both have their uphill battles.

 

[Weadazoid]

There's no way in hell that Thor makes $400 million domestic. Spider-Man barely did, and he's one of the most recognizable pop culture characters. Very few movies make $400 million domestic. Thor will not be one of them.

However, I think Thor has an edge over Green Lantern. Both have fanciful characters and feature otherworldy realms. However, Thor is going to have a lot of press tying it into Marvel's growing world of films. GL won't be related to the Batman film world in any way. Also, GL is just a bit goofier due to him having a magic ring. Ring vs hammer? I'll go with the hammer. Lastly, GL is going to have numerous CGI characters. I'll go with guys in costume over CGI creations any day. And I think the public will too.

On to this threads' original question. Thor's box-office and reception is important to the Avengers' reception. However, Avengers will be shooting and potentially have principal photography wrapped by the time Thor comes out in theaters. It's not like Avengers will be canned if Thor doesn't live up to hopes and hype.

I think Cap will be even more interesting in terms of acceptance. People are overplaying how the name "America" will play overseas. It's a period piece set during the most popular (in terms of interest) war. Yes, it'll fit the superhero mold, but it also has a toe in the historic realm. This could be very helpful in setting it apart from the norm. And Cap is not going to be leader of the Avengers in the film. Fury is the leader. Iron Man/Tony Stark will likely have a far more important role in the film and likely be considered the leader. Maybe they'll be vying for leadership. I wouldn't expect Cap to automatically be the leader.

I think Thor and Captain America will each bring in about $200-250 million, but likely be in the low 200s domestically. They'll have openings of around $70+. I don't think either will near $100 million opening week, unless they have some incredible trailers and promotions. Marvel did well with promoting Iron Man, so maybe they'll be able to do wonders with Thor and Cap, too.


BTW, Iron Man, Cap, and Thor have always been my top 3 superheroes. I've read their comics for 30+ years. I'm hoping Thor and Cap join IM in popularity with the public. I'm also a skeptic, though. And realize they both have their uphill battles.

I stand by the idea that Thor will look different enough to attract a diverse audience beyond the Marvel faithful.

The Trailers play into this big time, I hope they spend half the trailer emphasiving just how elaborate and epic Asgaurd will be in the reveals. WHen they mix that with strange goings on on Earth, like the Destoryer reveal that came from the Comic Con trailer, it should pull people in.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I'd be cool with the plot of Avengers involving Iron Man claiming leadership before Cap comes along and totally puts him to shame, automatically winning the others' loyalty. 'Cause, really, that's kind of how it went in the comics. Iron Man was the de facto leader early on (they didn't technically have a leader, but Iron Man just sort of took the reins because that's how he is), they discover Cap, they go along with their nebulous non-leader team, the founders leave, and from that moment on Cap is always considered the leader of the Avengers. Other, official leaders will defer to him if he makes suggestions and everything. Meanwhile, Iron Man is rarely more than a total screw-up as leader.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

There's no way in hell that Thor makes $400 million domestic. Spider-Man barely did, and he's one of the most recognizable pop culture characters. Very few movies make $400 million domestic. Thor will not be one of them.

However, I think Thor has an edge over Green Lantern. Both have fanciful characters and feature otherworldy realms. However, Thor is going to have a lot of press tying it into Marvel's growing world of films. GL won't be related to the Batman film world in any way. Also, GL is just a bit goofier due to him having a magic ring. Ring vs hammer? I'll go with the hammer. Lastly, GL is going to have numerous CGI characters. I'll go with guys in costume over CGI creations any day. And I think the public will too.

On to this threads' original question. Thor's box-office and reception is important to the Avengers' reception. However, Avengers will be shooting and potentially have principal photography wrapped by the time Thor comes out in theaters. It's not like Avengers will be canned if Thor doesn't live up to hopes and hype.

I think Cap will be even more interesting in terms of acceptance. People are overplaying how the name "America" will play overseas. It's a period piece set during the most popular (in terms of interest) war. Yes, it'll fit the superhero mold, but it also has a toe in the historic realm. This could be very helpful in setting it apart from the norm. And Cap is not going to be leader of the Avengers in the film. Fury is the leader. Iron Man/Tony Stark will likely have a far more important role in the film and likely be considered the leader. Maybe they'll be vying for leadership. I wouldn't expect Cap to automatically be the leader.

I think Thor and Captain America will each bring in about $200-250 million, but likely be in the low 200s domestically. They'll have openings of around $70+. I don't think either will near $100 million opening week, unless they have some incredible trailers and promotions. Marvel did well with promoting Iron Man, so maybe they'll be able to do wonders with Thor and Cap, too.


BTW, Iron Man, Cap, and Thor have always been my top 3 superheroes. I've read their comics for 30+ years. I'm hoping Thor and Cap join IM in popularity with the public. I'm also a skeptic, though. And realize they both have their uphill battles.

Sorry,but I don't think that Thor has the edge over GL,most of the general audience isn't into the Shakespearian type of stuff,especially the main target audience that the Thor movie is suppose to get attention from. Or if Robin Hood was anything to go by imo,which was PG-13,that did better overseas than it did in the domestic area. So what if GL has CGI characters? The new Star Wars movies did,and so did both Transformers movies,there should be no problem with them and it's not like all of the GL related characters are all aliens. It won't matter if the general audience digs the GL movie. The general audience is very use to CGI characters and can still suspend disbelief,however Thor can get lots of butts in the seats with the trailer or trailers if they don't come off as too Shakespearian like. Imo.

 

[Tony Stark]

I'd be cool with the plot of Avengers involving Iron Man claiming leadership before Cap comes along and totally puts him to shame, automatically winning the others' loyalty. 'Cause, really, that's kind of how it went in the comics. Iron Man was the de facto leader early on (they didn't technically have a leader, but Iron Man just sort of took the reins because that's how he is), they discover Cap, they go along with their nebulous non-leader team, the founders leave, and from that moment on Cap is always considered the leader of the Avengers. Other, official leaders will defer to him if he makes suggestions and everything. Meanwhile, Iron Man is rarely more than a total screw-up as leader.

What I would like to see is similar to how Abrams handled Spock and Kirk in Star Trek. With the battles between the two, but ultimately Kirk taking command, the two having respect and a growing friendship, with both as leaders, but ultimately Kirk on top.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Meh, Tony's not really a leader to me. He's a guy who's arrogant enough to believe he is in spite of the evidence. Business leader, sure; a man who can get up there and inspire others to fight and lead them to greatness? Not really. Certainly nowhere on the level of Captain America. Then again, neither are the Vision or the Scarlet Witch or yes, even Thor. The difference is that Tony absolutely thinks he is, whereas the rest are content to follow Cap's lead because they recognize he's the best leader the Avengers will ever have.

 

[Spider-Vader]

I really don't see why everyone's down playing Thor. If Marvel markets it similarly to Iron Man, I see it being a hit.

 

[GhostPoet]

My goal: To avoid every trailer for this film until I see the film.

I can do it!!!

 

[jmc]

There's no way in hell that Thor makes $400 million domestic. Spider-Man barely did, and he's one of the most recognizable pop culture characters. Very few movies make $400 million domestic. Thor will not be one of them.

However, I think Thor has an edge over Green Lantern. Both have fanciful characters and feature otherworldy realms. However, Thor is going to have a lot of press tying it into Marvel's growing world of films. GL won't be related to the Batman film world in any way. Also, GL is just a bit goofier due to him having a magic ring. Ring vs hammer? I'll go with the hammer. Lastly, GL is going to have numerous CGI characters. I'll go with guys in costume over CGI creations any day. And I think the public will too.

I'm gonna try and sound as objective as possible here but I think what puts GL in a better position is a) Visuals, GL has the potential given the limitless abilities of what the ring can do to bring something that's visually spectacular and more unique to screen b) Sci-fi element, the genre is going through a golden period at the moment with Star Trek, Inception, Avatar, District 9, Moon, etc, if there's ever a good time to bring out GL it's now, c) Ryan Reynolds, he's got a name and the dude can act, even though Thor has got a good cast (except it's lead IMO), Hemsworth is a nobody, in fact most Aussies would struggle to recognize him. A large part of why IM1 was a success was down to RDJ, people just like the guy, this is why anyone expecting IM like number I believe is overestimating the situation because it's a different set of circumstances. I also believe people are overestimating the whole Marvel universe appeal, just coz IM is loved doesn't mean subsequent characters are going to be equally embraced, it's foolish to assume Joe Public is just going to go along like the rest of us, a large percentage of which wouldn't even be aware that there is a Marvel universe. I think the one area where Thor has the advantage is the directing department, Branagh and Campbell are both good directors, but I think Branagh brings more substance to his flicks, but it's gonna depend on how much of a leash Marvel have him one, if he's been aloud to make the movie he wants then potentially I think Thor could be a better movie overall. I still think Cap Am is gonna struggle purely from it's release date, a week after HP7 part 2 is bordering on suicide. That said, all the films could end up being crap for all we know.

 

[BoredGuy]

^^ I think it's funny how everyone now pretends RDJ was this huge star before Iron Man.

That movie gave him his career back!!

As I recall there was quite a bit of complaining about RDJ till the movie actually came out and everyone saw how awesome he was as Stark.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

so, all the people who went into the theatres and had know idea who iron man was but wanted to watch the new movie with RDJ are no indicator that RDJ MIGHT have been a star long before IM?

 

[Infinity9999x]

so, all the people who went into the theatres and had know idea who iron man was but wanted to watch the new movie with RDJ are no indicator that RDJ MIGHT have been a star long before IM?

I'm sorry, but RDJ wasn't a big crowd puller before IM. He had been in some things, and his career was moving back up, but I didn't meet anybody saying "Oh man! I want to see this for RDJ!"

The reason tons of people went to the movie was because Marvel did a fantastic advertising job. And then it had good staying power because RDJ did a great job in the role.

 

[BoredGuy]

^^ Precisely

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

I'm sorry, but RDJ wasn't a big crowd puller before IM. He had been in some things, and his career was moving back up, but I didn't meet anybody saying "Oh man! I want to see this for RDJ!"

The reason tons of people went to the movie was because Marvel did a fantastic advertising job. And then it had good staying power because RDJ did a great job in the role.

wrong! I know quite a few people who watched IM just because of RDJ and who would've watched anything with RDJ in it long before IM. If anything resurected his career it probably was Ally McBeal or Zodiac, maybe Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. By the time he played Tony Stark, RDJ already was where he used to be in the early 90ies.

But this has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

 

[jmc]

^^ I think it's funny how everyone now pretends RDJ was this huge star before Iron Man.

That movie gave him his career back!!

As I recall there was quite a bit of complaining about RDJ till the movie actually came out and everyone saw how awesome he was as Stark.

No-one said he was a huge star, but he's always had that lovable rogue aspect about him which people liked, IM really gave him the chance to show that side of himself in a mainstream blockbuster. I'll say it before and I'll say it again, if anyone other than RDJ had played Stark there's no way that film would have been as big as it was, that was as perfect a piece of casting as you can get. And no, that film didn't give him back his career, I'd argue Kiss Kiss Bang Bang probably did that.

 

[hatebox]

I see this doing little more than Batman Begins type numbers, both domestic and internationally, but if its as warmly received by critics and fans as that movie was then Marvel will probably be happy.

I still think Cap Am will underperform though. Lightweight star and lightweight director.

 

[Weadazoid]

Well... you have to go back pretty far to find a movie that opened on this date and underperformed



Like MI 3 or Van Helsing. -They were stinkers

 

[marcvader]

I think many of you are underestimating Cap's mass appeal especially to the over 30 crowd. After Spidey and Hulk, Cap comes next in name recognition for Marvel characters to the general public. Yeah the release date sucks but I think it will be alright . Thor will do well.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I think many of you are underestimating Cap's mass appeal especially to the over 30 crowd. After Spidey and Hulk, Cap comes next in name recognition for Marvel characters to the general public. Yeah the release date sucks but I think it will be alright . Thor will do well.

I really don't think so. Spidey, Hulk, Wolverine, Iron Man (because of the recent movies) and then maybe Cap.

Cap is recognizable by costume, but people don't really know captain America. And this isn't a knock on Cap, the guy just hasn't had much general public exposure in the past decade.

Think about it, Spider-man, Wolverine, Iron Man, and Hulk have all had their own Movies, Video Games, and TV series based on them in the past 10 to 15 years. Some have had multiple.

Cap hasn't had any of that. Cap is pretty low on the awareness scale.

 

[marcvader]

Older people know Cap. There's a reason his death was covered in the news media. I'm not talking about popularity right now. The other angle people are discounting is the patriotic public especially during the month of July. You know there are going to be Americans thinking this movie is going to be some "America Duck Yeah!" type of movie.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Older people know Cap. There's a reason his death was covered in the news media. I'm not talking about popularity right now. The other angle people are discounting is the patriotic public especially during the month of July. You know there are going to be Americans thinking this movie is going to be some "America Duck Yeah!" type of movie.

That could help, but the problem with cap is that his death coverage a few years ago was the only exposure the guy has had to the mainstream public. And yes, older people know Cap, but the generation that knew him the most is around grandparent age. And that's not a big crowd. The over 50 age group isn't going to be rushing to the movie theatre.

Not to mention that Cap is opening the week after the final episode of Harry Potter. That's pretty much movie suicide.

 

[marcvader]

Well I'm thinking more people in their 30's and 40's. Cap had the cartoons and the TV movies.