Yes, absolutely. 3 a year should be rare, maybe just a one-time thing to finally get Ant-Man made.Just a question,,,, as much as I would like to see all this happen. Dont you guys feel like it will lead to a little over saturation in the market. Kinda like a fad for a bit but then people may become a little bored with it after a point?
As much as Im sure there will be reasons why it wont, you really have to view this as everyone in here is a little biased towards this happening, I dont mean that in a bad way at all. Im just saying that we are all bigger fans of this then the average Joe so to speak.
Not one of them truly broke out, and one of them failed in almost every possible way. How is that working well?I think 4 big superhero movies a year is not saturation, that's what we had in 2011 and it worked well (X-Men First Class, Thor, Green Lantern, Captain America).
I think 4 big superhero movies a year is not saturation, that's what we had in 2011 and it worked well (X-Men First Class, Thor, Green Lantern, Captain America). The question then just becomes a guessing game of how many other superhero movies are coming out that year? Right now, it's not really possible to tell what's going on in Summer 2016. Will the Justice League actually come out in 2015? Will it succeed and spinoff any other films? ASM2 will be in 2014, will they keep it coming on a two year jump, or will there be scheduling delays?
I think when you talk about smaller and not-quite-superheroic films like Hellboy II, Punisher War Zone and Wanted, you can have those in the same year with a Dark Knight, Hulk, Iron Man 2 and Hancock and still not flood the market, like in 2008. I think some of these films, like Heroes for Hire or Ant-Man or others, might benefit from being smaller off-summer films like that.
It's a balance, and a dance, but it's possible for MS to do four movies in an otherwise dry year. Three movies would probably be wiser though. 2 one year, 3 the next, 2-3-2-3.
We've seen mulple superhero movies per year every year since about 1999. If the bubble were going to burst, it would have by now.
This. 2011 gave us 3 new CBM and a reboot. They weren't no SM even Batman started in the 200s and a low showing WW. I would say the 4 did well all considered, maybe FC underperformed and GL bombed.We've seen mulple superhero movies per year every year since about 1999. If the bubble were going to burst, it would have by now.
It's not about a bubble bursting. Usually one or two come away as clear winners each year and the rest either do middling business or fail completely. Cramming more and more into each year is only hurting your odds of each movie being the one to really and truly catch on
It's like the CG animated films - they used to all do well, then studios started cramming more into each year, and we started to see ones that either came and went or flat out failed
You want to put each of your 150+M investments in the best position to succeed, and the way to do that is certainly not by flooding the market with them
Which ones in 2013 will fail or do medicore business. IM3 and Thor 2 will not falter, its either Wolverine or MoS. If you consider XO:W a success, TW should follow suit. The wildcard is MoS the good thing is there is no DMC the following week.It's not about a bubble bursting. Usually one or two come away as clear winners each year and the rest either do middling business or fail completely. Cramming more and more into each year is only hurting your odds of each movie being the one to really and truly catch on
It's like the CG animated films - they used to all do well, then studios started cramming more into each year, and we started to see ones that either came and went or flat out failed
You want to put each of your 150+M investments in the best position to succeed, and the way to do that is certainly not by flooding the market with them
It's not about a bubble bursting. Usually one or two come away as clear winners each year and the rest either do middling business or fail completely. Cramming more and more into each year is only hurting your odds of each movie being the one to really and truly catch on
It's like the CG animated films - they used to all do well, then studios started cramming more into each year, and we started to see ones that either came and went or flat out failed
You want to put each of your 150+M investments in the best position to succeed, and the way to do that is certainly not by flooding the market with them
Agree.Exactly. I actually think? Later franchises will be the glue that keeps the MCU together from generation to generation.
For example, when The Avengers 3 ends, depending on the status of TIH2 Mark Ruffalo will still have 2-3 more films on his contract (Unless they cameo him.) The Guardians of the Galaxy actors will likely have 3 films left, Whoever winds up playing Doctor Strange will likely have films left on his contract.
Basically I see a transitional block of films in the late 10's early 20's, Involving new properties, sequels to phase 2 and 3 properties, and maybe a surprise return to the marvel camp (Fantastic 4?) before they recast the big 3 Avengers.
Marvel Studios can't just stop making movies. They're a film company and that's what they do.

I have a question.. I keep hearing everyone talking about who has the rights to different titles.. Like I know Marvel dont have the Fantastic Four, X-Men, Spiderman.. What other titles don't Marvel have? And whos all included in all of these titles?? Like since Marvel dont have the X-Men, does that include every mutant in the Marvel Universe? Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver were Avengers more than they were X-men.. Since Silver Surfer was in the FF movie, Marvel can't use him, Even tho he was also an Avenger.. Where do the Inhumans fall? They were first introduced in the Fantastic Four.. Are they off limits?