MCU: Phase II

[cherokeesam]

Part of the problem is there is 40 years of comic continuity to draw on, but in that 40 years origins have changed and so has parts of the continuity. But all these writers have had TIME to let their stories resonate with a fan base.

Basically the point I'm trying to make is you have to let these studios/directors/actors, Start and finish their telling of the story and leave TIME for it to resonate with the fan base.

If you just recast/reboot/retell and don't give a little space between the "visions" it just looks forced. Kinda like the reaction everyone was giving TASM to the Raimi versions.

I don't think an all-time record Tuesday opening at $35 mill is going to hurt Spidey's bottom line one bit. Looks like the GA are rolling with the changes just fine.

 

[Big Green]

I don't think an all-time record Tuesday opening at $35 mill is going to hurt Spidey's bottom line one bit. Looks like the GA are rolling with the changes just fine.

3D ticket prices and inflation in price/population... It's gonna make as much if not more than the original on numbers, that's a no brainer.

 

[KangConquers]

Something other than Avengers, perhaps? At that point, it's entirely possible they could have the Fantastic Four, or even X-Men franchises back. This is to say nothing of the Marvel Knights heroes. Not making Avengers movies doesn't preclude making movies. Heck, they could even continue the MCU. Who knows, it might continue to be wildly successful (perhaps Feige will dedicate the rest of his professional life to the MCU, or the next producers will be equally savvy?) and they'll have to do a soft time travel/Trek-style reboot with the next generation so that they can keep the continuity that's been established somehow. Or not... it's all a bit speculative, isn't it?

A single avengers film just grossed 3 times what any X-Men film has ever grossed, and well over 4 times what any Fantastic 4 film grossed. Rebooting those franchises wouldn't fill the void of an Avengers film series, neither would pedaling Luke Cage and Iron Fist movies, who could probably only gross 1/8th what Avengers wound up doing.

The Dark Knight Rises marks the 7th Batman film in the last 23 years. I'd love to see Marvel be able to churn out 6-7 more by 2035.

 

[bubbadoom]

So CAP 2 starts shooting in Jan, and then SHIELD after that...maybe that's the mystery movie for the latter half of 2014...

 

[cherokeesam]

So CAP 2 starts shooting in Jan, and then SHIELD after that...maybe that's the mystery movie for the latter half of 2014...

???

Where'd you get this info from.....???

 

[Tony Stark]

I don't think an all-time record Tuesday opening at $35 mill is going to hurt Spidey's bottom line one bit. Looks like the GA are rolling with the changes just fine.

I somewhat agree, however this was the lowest opening day for a Spider-man film, and with inflation and 3D boost that's only exaggerated. I think it's a good start, and somewhat to be expected (ala Batman Begins), but it's really only going to count if they make a totally kick ass second installment. And I mean the next one hast to be undoubtedly the best Spider-man film ever. It has to kick Spider-man 2's ass.

So inshort, for a reboot, this looks promising, but they have to cash it in next round, or the character will be shelved for the foreseeable future.

 

[Hawkingbird]

Has ASM beaten Avengers?!!!?

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Has ASM beaten Avengers?!!!?

I highly doubt it

 

[roach]

Has ASM beaten Avengers?!!!?

in one day???

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

Has ASM beaten Avengers?!!!?

As much as I liked ASM, I doubt that'll happen

 

[DrCosmic]

Ask people which movie had the better version of Bruce Wayne's parents getting mugged in Crime Alley. I'm sure the vast majority (including me) will say Batman Begins. So if that's the "best" possible origin story we can get for Batman, for instance, why on earth would you revisit the same old ground in the inevitable reboot, knowing damn well that people are going to say that Nolan did it better? Same thing with Iron Man....if they someday reboot the franchise, who's going to want to sit through The Cave and Yinsen again?

All reboots do is dilute the property. They show that the studio has so little faith in their material that their entire strategy revolves around trying again every few years in hopes that somebody will like at least *one* of the versions that's offered.

I don't see your logic, homie. Just because something is better than the previous version, it does not then logically follow that that is the best possible. Amazing Spider-Man is probably the best example of rebooting something that's already been origined in modern times. You tweak the origin and focus on a different part of it, and it was great, imho.

Reboots do much more than dilute the property, not the least of which is keep properties going that otherwise would be on indefinite hiatus. What reboot have you seen that fits the strategy you describe?

Can I just reiterate how badly I want a Whedon/Goddard Hulk film?

I don't even like Hulk that much, but I would be so down for that.

A single avengers film just grossed 3 times what any X-Men film has ever grossed, and well over 4 times what any Fantastic 4 film grossed. Rebooting those franchises wouldn't fill the void of an Avengers film series, neither would pedaling Luke Cage and Iron Fist movies, who could probably only gross 1/8th what Avengers wound up doing.

The Dark Knight Rises marks the 7th Batman film in the last 23 years. I'd love to see Marvel be able to churn out 6-7 more by 2035.

That's a good point. They would need a team up movie in order to replace that box office. That said, that could certainly be accomplished with the aforementioned properties as either Defenders or Adjective Avengers or Secret Wars or Onslaught or X-Men v Fantastic Four, or whatever.

The Dark Knight Rises marks the third film in the second Batman film continuity. I have no doubt that Avengers can have four movies and then reboot and have three more by 2035, but that's not a model that I'm in great favor of. I would even dare call it a worst case scenario.

 

[cherokeesam]

I don't see your logic, homie. Just because something is better than the previous version, it does not then logically follow that that is the best possible. Amazing Spider-Man is probably the best example of rebooting something that's already been origined in modern times. You tweak the origin and focus on a different part of it, and it was great, imho.

But at some point, *someone* is going to make the best possible version of any given franchise, correct? The best Batman, the best Spidey, the best 007, whatever. So why would you try to reboot a franchise to make a *better* version of *the best*....?

Reboots do much more than dilute the property, not the least of which is keep properties going that otherwise would be on indefinite hiatus. What reboot have you seen that fits the strategy you describe?

If it's an ONGOING franchise, that remains IN CONTINUITY (regardless of changes in cast or crew), then how the hell could it go "on hiatus".....?

 

[Brawl]

But at some point, *someone* is going to make the best possible version of any given franchise, correct? The best Batman, the best Spidey, the best 007, whatever. So why would you try to reboot a franchise to make a *better* version of *the best*....?

Don't know if you can classify something as the "best" because time continues to roll on. You can only compare movies that are made. If none are made how do you know you have the best? Technology also makes reboot essential. I remember the old TV Spiderman movies from the 70s and was freaking out as a kid while spideman ran around shooting balls of fat marine rope from his 10lb wrist shooters. I thought that was the best. ASM was a good reboot due to Tobey just getting too plumb old and although i don't remember Spidey being a hoodie wearing skateboarder I know they couldn't make him in big round glasses wearing the yellow sweaters vests i remember him wearing.

If someone has a vision to make a better film I hope they follow it because it might be damn good It's a shame that the favorite version of the Hulk franchise so far for me was in The Avengers. I would love to have had 2 feature length movies under my belt of that version of Hulk.

 

[bubbadoom]

They made the best 007 film in 1963, but have done plenty more since then...

 

[Big Green]

Ongoing series eventually lose steam, because people will become disinterested. Example Saw, the first 2 were pretty good stand alone movies. By the time they got to 6 and so on, it was pretty much a big joke. I think that people even fans will get sick of an ongoing franchise. "Avengers 12: Watch us beat the bad guy again". How can you convince the audience that the threat in the 12th movie is as daunting as the threat/villain in the 2nd or 3rd. Eventually the movies would be just like watching a T.V series.

 

[DrCosmic]

But at some point, *someone* is going to make the best possible version of any given franchise, correct? The best Batman, the best Spidey, the best 007, whatever. So why would you try to reboot a franchise to make a *better* version of *the best*....?

No. Art can always improve, deepen, broaden, elevate further. There is no such thing as the 'best possible version' especially as that version will inevitably age and then a more impressive version can be created with future methods, perspective and technology.

How would you know if a version was the best possible version, anyway? Without being able to see the future?

If it's an ONGOING franchise, that remains IN CONTINUITY (regardless of changes in cast or crew), then how the hell could it go "on hiatus".....?

The same way all other ongoing franchises that remain in continuity have gone on hiatus. That's how reality works: series don't go on forever. They die naturally and get revived. Your only choices are to push it until no one cares (Saw, Bond, Star Trek), or go out on a high note (Star Wars, Lord of the Rings). No one has the power to magically make any given continuity go on indefinitely. If you choose the former, you'll have to reboot. If you choose the latter, you can grow your same continuity later and still have everyone's attention because you haven't crammed unwanted installments into the market.

 

[DrCosmic]

Don't know if you can classify something as the "best" because time continues to roll on. You can only compare movies that are made. If none are made how do you know you have the best? Technology also makes reboot essential. I remember the old TV Spiderman movies from the 70s and was freaking out as a kid while spideman ran around shooting balls of fat marine rope from his 10lb wrist shooters. I thought that was the best. ASM was a good reboot due to Tobey just getting too plumb old and although i don't remember Spidey being a hoodie wearing skateboarder I know they couldn't make him in big round glasses wearing the yellow sweaters vests i remember him wearing.

If someone has a vision to make a better film I hope they follow it because it might be damn good It's a shame that the favorite version of the Hulk franchise so far for me was in The Avengers. I would love to have had 2 feature length movies under my belt of that version of Hulk.

Exactly. And it's not like this is going to happen five years from now. We're talking about a generation away, when Amazing Spider-Man will not only be corny, but perhaps irrelevant.

They made the best 007 film in 1963, but have done plenty more since then...

They've definitely had some good ones, no doubt about that. I'd rather have quality over quantity though, I guess is what I'm saying.

Ongoing series eventually lose steam, because people will become disinterested. Example Saw, the first 2 were pretty good stand alone movies. By the time they got to 6 and so on, it was pretty much a big joke. I think that people even fans will get sick of an ongoing franchise. "Avengers 12: Watch us beat the bad guy again". How can you convince the audience that the threat in the 12th movie is as daunting as the threat/villain in the 2nd or 3rd. Eventually the movies would be just like watching a T.V series.

Indeed. I think Avengers can make 9 movies, really. I think 9 movies is enough to cover every conceivable (credible) threat to the Avengers and mankind.
In no particular order: [1) Dumb Aliens, 2) Smart Aliens 3) Robots, 4) Infighting 5) Viruses/Undead 6) Allied Supervillains 7) Time Travel 8) Humanity 9) Alternate Realities] and I think they can cover these threats so thoroughly that anything that revisits these threat types not only will be a rehash, but won't be credible (as they've already conquered something similar). In fact, I think not exhausting these threats will make for a sub-par movie in any given case, as you'd be holding back from making the best possible movie in hopes of a (certain) sequel, and the ground is littered with such presumptuous franchises.

 

[cherokeesam]

Ongoing series eventually lose steam, because people will become disinterested. Example Saw, the first 2 were pretty good stand alone movies. By the time they got to 6 and so on, it was pretty much a big joke. I think that people even fans will get sick of an ongoing franchise. "Avengers 12: Watch us beat the bad guy again". How can you convince the audience that the threat in the 12th movie is as daunting as the threat/villain in the 2nd or 3rd. Eventually the movies would be just like watching a T.V series.

And yet there are plenty of TV series that have lasted for 10 seasons, 15 seasons, even 20 or more seasons rehashing the same formula, yet still retaining fiercely loyal audiences.

No. Art can always improve, deepen, broaden, elevate further. There is no such thing as the 'best possible version' especially as that version will inevitably age and then a more impressive version can be created with future methods, perspective and technology.

Congratulations....you just gave an excuse for someone to create "a more impressive version" of Citizen Kane, the Sistine Chapel, and the works of Shakespeare.

How would you know if a version was the best possible version, anyway? Without being able to see the future?

Ever hear of the law of diminishing returns.....? You keep stopping and restarting a franchise, and covering the same old origin story in reboot after reboot, and whatever power and emotion the story originally held will be watered down and forgotten forevermore.

The same way all other ongoing franchises that remain in continuity have gone on hiatus. That's how reality works: series don't go on forever. They die naturally and get revived. Your only choices are to push it until no one cares (Saw, Bond, Star Trek), or go out on a high note (Star Wars, Lord of the Rings). No one has the power to magically make any given continuity go on indefinitely. If you choose the former, you'll have to reboot. If you choose the latter, you can grow your same continuity later and still have everyone's attention because you haven't crammed unwanted installments into the market.

Since when did Star Wars "go out on a high note" --- or go out, period? Last time I checked (30 seconds ago), Star Wars is still churning out umpteen video games, novels, comic books, cartoons, live action TV series, and most likely feature films for generations to come. Remember that Lucas still has a whole 'nuther post-Episode VI trilogy to get to. Too bad Star Wars "died naturally," and that "no one cares" about it anymore....somebody needs to inform Lucas and his media empire about that

 

[roach]

Since when did Star Wars "go out on a high note" --- or go out, period? Last time I checked (30 seconds ago), Star Wars is still churning out umpteen video games, novels, comic books, cartoons, live action TV series, and most likely feature films for generations to come. Remember that Lucas still has a whole 'nuther post-Episode VI trilogy to get to. Too bad Star Wars "died naturally," and that "no one cares" about it anymore....somebody needs to inform Lucas and his media empire about that

not sure if you are joking or serious

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

No. Art can always improve, deepen, broaden, elevate further. There is no such thing as the 'best possible version' especially as that version will inevitably age and then a more impressive version can be created with future methods, perspective and technology.

How would you know if a version was the best possible version, anyway? Without being able to see the future?



The same way all other ongoing franchises that remain in continuity have gone on hiatus. That's how reality works: series don't go on forever. They die naturally and get revived. Your only choices are to push it until no one cares (Saw, Bond, Star Trek), or go out on a high note (Star Wars, Lord of the Rings). No one has the power to magically make any given continuity go on indefinitely. If you choose the former, you'll have to reboot. If you choose the latter, you can grow your same continuity later and still have everyone's attention because you haven't crammed unwanted installments into the market.

I say the box office results of the previous movies of both say otherwise

 

[Brawl]

I say the box office results of the previous movies of both say otherwise

Box office pretty much is the only true qualifier if a movie was good enough for people to go sit down and watch it I don't care how many academy awards movies like The Artist win if people don't plump their fresh off work butts down to watch them.

People vote with their dollars if they think a franchise like Bond and ST are done. The last reboot of the old ST was one of the best movies I have seen in awhile. I thought Spock would be almost impossible to replace due to a string of bad vulcan acting but Z. Quinto was AMAZING!

What a sad and miserable world would this be if we thought that all the greatest works of art were behind us and mindless media is the only thing left for the future.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

It isn't the only true qualifier as there are other factors that can lead a good movie to not making as much money as it could. Also no one was talking about the Oscars.

 

[Hawkingbird]

in one day???

I meant in opening numbers?

 

[DrCosmic]

And yet there are plenty of TV series that have lasted for 10 seasons, 15 seasons, even 20 or more seasons rehashing the same formula, yet still retaining fiercely loyal audiences.

Fiercely loyal but shrinking audiences, that would shrink even more quickly if they had to wait 2-3 years and pay 10-20 bucks for every installment.

Congratulations....you just gave an excuse for someone to create "a more impressive version" of Citizen Kane, the Sistine Chapel, and the works of Shakespeare.

Who am I to say that no one ever will? People have tried, long before I was born. They haven't succeeded yet... as far as I know - though they have done a great job maintaining and preserving those works of art, haven't they? I wonder if they would make the necessary improvements to those works if they felt that they were perfect as they were.

Ever hear of the law of diminishing returns.....? You keep stopping and restarting a franchise, and covering the same old origin story in reboot after reboot, and whatever power and emotion the story originally held will be watered down and forgotten forevermore.

Yet every reboot tells the origin story differently, so it's not the same old, and by the third retelling, only 'old people' remember the first version, so it's not watered down for the target audience. Again, a new generation tells its own stories, that's how these characters can go on forever, not by new generations telling the previous generations' stories.

Since when did Star Wars "go out on a high note" --- or go out, period? Last time I checked (30 seconds ago), Star Wars is still churning out umpteen video games, novels, comic books, cartoons, live action TV series, and most likely feature films for generations to come. Remember that Lucas still has a whole 'nuther post-Episode VI trilogy to get to. Too bad Star Wars "died naturally," and that "no one cares" about it anymore....somebody needs to inform Lucas and his media empire about that

We're talking about films, so unless you have information about a new Star Wars film being made (you don't) then that must be what I was referring to. If I chose to switch subjects, then none of these series have ended or rebooted, there is always multimedia for the hardcore fan. Again, you rely on non-film examples to inform your film strategy instead of film history. If Star Wars hadn't had the presence of mind to end their stories, to go out on high notes in their trilogies, there wouldn't be any of the things you mentioned. Without an end to Luke's saga in the films... how could anyone possibly write the Thrawn Trilogy? If not for a definite arc for Anakin Skywalker, how could you do Clone Wars with any assurance that you wouldn't conflict with Anakin's unfinished story? Definite and final endings are what allow other media to tell stories that feed into it, all in the same continuity! Star Wars is proof of that. It's also proof that those things are for hardcore fans, not the masses.

But you don't want that for Avengers, you want one long endless continuity, which is a nice dream, but every attempt at doing so has ended in stagnation, decay and rebooting. Bond holds an impressive record, but modern and superheroic attempts at such infinity have been far more brief.

 

[Big Green]

Ever hear of the law of diminishing returns.....? You keep stopping and restarting a franchise, and covering the same old origin story in reboot after reboot, and whatever power and emotion the story originally held will be watered down

Have you ever heard of that law??? Cause it works both ways. If you keep telling the same story in a continuity for 12 films, guess what? Like it or not you will have diminishing returns. The reboot of Star Trek opened the door to an all new fan base, not just loyal "Trekkies". Just because YOU will see the movies doesn't mean everyone will. Due to contrary belief your $12 dollars doesn't keep the studio lights on...